netdev - Re: [for-next 4/6] net/mlx5: FPGA, Add basic support for Innova

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:44:53 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com, ilant@...lanox.com,
        saeedm@....mellanox.co.il, dledford@...hat.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        jsorensen@...com, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
        linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org, yi1.li@...ux.intel.com,
        borisp@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [for-next 4/6] net/mlx5: FPGA, Add basic support for Innova

On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 03:01:51PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 11:55:33 -0700
> 
> > If in the future mlx will make it into the nic in a way that
> > encryption shares all memory management logic and there is no fpga
> > at all then it indeed will be similar to tc offload. Right now it's
> > not and needs different sw architecture.
> 
> If the visible effect is identical, I fundamentally disagree with you.
> 
> I don't care if there is a frog sitting on the PHY that transforms
> the packets, it's all the same if the visible behavior is identical.

that frog is a good example why we disagree.
I need to check the pulse of that frog and last time it ate.
In production I cannot have magical creatures do stuff for me.
I need to monitor all components, debug and mitigate the issues.
If encryption is done by the nic, I get all the monitoring and
debugging as part of the standard tools. When it's a frog
hidden by the nic, I cannot do much when the fire erupts,
hence frog and production environment don't mix.
To move things forward...
how about marking the whole thing CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL instead of revert?
Right now it's effectively non-production==experimental code and
I want to make it clear.