linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 0/7] A General Accelerator Framework, WarpDrive

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]

Message-ID: <AADFC41AFE54684AB9EE6CBC0274A5D1912B39B3@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Aug 2018 08:31:31 +0000
From:   "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To:     Kenneth Lee <liguozhu@...ilicon.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
CC:     Kenneth Lee <nek.in.cn@...il.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Zaibo Xu <xuzaibo@...wei.com>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
        Hao Fang <fanghao11@...wei.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linuxarm@...wei.com" <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Philippe Ombredanne" <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "linux-accelerators@...ts.ozlabs.org" 
        <linux-accelerators@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 0/7] A General Accelerator Framework, WarpDrive

> From: Kenneth Lee [mailto:liguozhu@...ilicon.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2018 4:04 PM
> 
> But we have another requirement which is to combine some device
> together to
> share the same address space. This is a little like these kinds of solution:
> 
> http://tce.technion.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2015/06/SC-7.2-M.-
> Silberstein.pdf
> 
> With that, the application can directly pass the NiC packet pointer to the
> decryption accelerator, and get the bare data in place. This is the feature
> that
> the VFIO container can provide.

above is not a good argument, at least in the context of your discussion.
If each device has their own interface (similar to GPU) for process to bind 
with, then having the process binding to multiple devices one-by-one then
you still get same address space shared cross them...

Thanks
Kevin