netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] nfp: extend match and action for flower 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: <20171009080545.GB11130@netronome.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:05:46 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
To:     Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        oss-drivers@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] nfp: extend match and action for flower
 offload

On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 08:34:59AM -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
> Simon,
> 
> Maybe a bit off topic, but I had the impression netronome would
> support BPF so that filters could be programmed for arbitrary
> protocols and fields. Is that true? If so, what is the relationship
> between that functionality and these patches?

Hi Tom,

you are correct in thinking that Netronome is supporting BPF offload
in its nfp driver. That support continues to be enhanced and supported.

This patch-set relates to a different set of functionality, offload of the
TC flower classifier. At this point there is no relationship between the
two sets of functionality and they cannot be used at the same time;
different firmware images are required and the driver initiates itself
according to the firmware loaded.

In future it may be possible to use both BPF and TC flower offloads at the
same time but that is not the case at this time.

Does that answer your question?