[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOtvUMdrMEPjXqVk66EOM+2NYoU-Hze2+5Vx6HGuR4FDNxYzDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 15:16:57 +0300
From: Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>
To: Harsh Jain <harshjain.prof@...il.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Gary Hook <gary.hook@....com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
Arnaud Ebalard <arno@...isbad.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
keyrings@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ima-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-ima-user@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Ofir Drang <ofir.drang@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/19] simplify crypto wait for async op
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Harsh Jain <harshjain.prof@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Harsh Jain <harshjain.prof@...il.com> wrote:
>>> HI Gilad,
>>>
>>> I think we need an update in ESP also. Now EBUSY return means driver
>>> has accepted, Packet should not be dropped in
>>>
>>> esp_output_tail() function.
>>
>> Good catch. You are right and the same holds true for ah_output() in ah4.c.
>>
>> But I do wonder, the code there now treats -EBUSY as a special case
>> and returns NET_XMIT_DROP
>> but if an AEAD or AHASH transformation return some other error, like
>> -ENOMEM or -EINVAL shouldn't
>> we return NET_XMIT_DROP in that case too?
> I think we should not, XMIT_DROP implies drop current packet only,
> later on when device is recovered from busy state, Upper layer
> protocol(TCP) will re-transmit the packet. It helps in flow control.
>>
I see. Makes sense.
Thanks,
Gilad
--
Gilad Ben-Yossef
Chief Coffee Drinker
"If you take a class in large-scale robotics, can you end up in a
situation where the homework eats your dog?"
-- Jean-Baptiste Queru
Powered by blists - more mailing lists