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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:32:35 -0400 From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca> To: San Mehat <san@...gle.com> Cc: davem@...emloft.net, mst@...hat.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, digitaleric@...gle.com, mikew@...gle.com, miche@...gle.com, maccarro@...gle.com Subject: Re: [RFC 0/0] Introducing a generic socket offload framework On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 07:58 -0700, San Mehat wrote: > Can you explain a good use-case for SOCK_RAW in this type of > environment? We were noodling it around locally and couldn't come up > with one that we needed to support. One that comes to mind is the case of Samir's app: youd need to handle some of the apps that ride on top of IP typically using SOCK_RAW eg ping, OSPF essentially anything on IP that doesnt have transport built into kernel etc; > > Q: If you want this to be transparent to the apps, who/what is doing > > the tagging of SOCK_HWASSIST? clearly not the app if you dont want to > > change it. > > The decision of whether to tag a socket or not is made by the 'hardware' As in some config interface? cheers, jamal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists