netdev - Re: [patch net-next RFC 10/12] openvswitch: add support for datapath hardware offload

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: <20140826184138.GB5275@gospo.rtplab.test>
Date:	Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:41:38 -0400
From:	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	dborkman <dborkman@...hat.com>, ogerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	jesse@...ira.com, pshelar@...ira.com, azhou@...ira.com,
	ben@...adent.org.uk, stephen@...workplumber.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
	xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, linville@...driver.com,
	dev@...nvswitch.org, jasowang@...hat.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, ryazanov.s.a@...il.com,
	buytenh@...tstofly.org, aviadr@...lanox.com, nbd@...nwrt.org,
	alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, Neil.Jerram@...aswitch.com,
	ronye@...lanox.com, Shrijeet Mukherjee <shm@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 10/12] openvswitch: add support for datapath
 hardware offload

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 05:19:56PM +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> On 08/26/14 at 11:54am, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
> > It is easy to *say* it could be added later, but connecting to software
> > forwarding in the kernel outside of OVS (which is important to some)
> > would take significant effort since this set only connects switch
> > hardware to OVS.
> 
> Can you explain why that effort is more significant if a flow API
> added first? I'm not saying it is easy to offload the existing
> forwarding path, otherwise it would have been done already, but
> I don't understand how the proposal makes this any more difficult.
Sorry if I introduced any confusion.  My intent was not to imply there
was specific increased technical effort required to implement other
software forwarding elements in hardware if a flow-based API is added
first.

> > It may be that all software-based forwarding is done via OVS in the
> > future, but it feels like we are long way from that future for those
> > that do not want to use an external controller.
> 
> Wait... I don't want to use OpenFlow to configure my laptop ;-)
You don't?  I do.  ;-)

--
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