[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ3xEMhFm_AXmU=j30J8BRViTCUTau0hRDRjRPYW9nyYuQ0=Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 12:15:58 +0200
From: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To: Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Ilya Lesokhin <ilyal@...lanox.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"davejwatson@...com" <davejwatson@...com>,
"tom@...bertland.com" <tom@...bertland.com>,
"hannes@...essinduktion.org" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Aviad Yehezkel <aviadye@...lanox.com>,
Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/6] tls: Add generic NIC offload infrastructure
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com> wrote:
> Isn't this a chicken and egg problem, where something must come first,
> driver or infra. Unless we combine the infra patches with mlx5 driver
> code and submit both in a single pull request.
why chicken and egg? you do the infra changes and apply them on the driver.
> Here, we assumed that the infra goes first, and we will submit the
> driver soon after. We could submit the driver first instead.
NOo Boris,
It is fundamental requirement to show a use-case along with infra-structure.
Or.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists