netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/4] net: dsa: Link aggregation support

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: <20201204003527.uvwyem3mlacr5cjp@skbuf>
Date:   Fri, 4 Dec 2020 02:35:27 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        j.vosburgh@...il.com, vfalico@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/4] net: dsa: Link aggregation support

On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 10:35:12PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> - If offloading is available, reject anything that can not be
>   offloaded. My guess is that _any_ hardware offloaded setup will almost
>   always yield a better solution for the user than a software fallback.

For the case where the switch ports are not bridged, just under a bond,
do you expect the hardware offloading to make any sort of difference?
If you don't, then why would we deny software-applied bonding policies?