netdev - Re: [PATCH ipsec-next 6/6] xfrm: enforce separation between priorities of HW/SW policies

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]

Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 17:07:02 +0200
From:   Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC:     Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Raed Salem <raeds@...dia.com>,
        ipsec-devel <devel@...ux-ipsec.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next 6/6] xfrm: enforce separation between
 priorities of HW/SW policies

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 01:36:57PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> 
> Devices that implement IPsec full offload mode offload policies too.
> In RX path, it causes to the situation that HW can't effectively handle
> mixed SW and HW priorities unless users make sure that HW offloaded
> policies have higher priorities.
> 
> In order to make sure that users have coherent picture, let's require to
> make sure that HW offloaded policies have always (both RX and TX) higher
> priorities than SW ones.

I'm still not sure whether splitting priorities in software and hardware
is the right way to go. I fear we can get problems with corner cases we
don't think about now. But OTOH I don't have a better idea. So maybe
someone on the list has an opinion on that.