[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YoHel1LqqtNe0U01@unreal>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 08:18:15 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc: "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 3/6] xfrm: add an interface to offload policy
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 04:44:32PM +0200, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 01:36:54PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> >
> > +int xfrm_dev_policy_add(struct net *net, struct xfrm_policy *xp,
> > + struct xfrm_user_offload *xuo, u8 dir)
> > +{
> > + struct xfrm_dev_offload *xdo = &xp->xdo;
> > + struct net_device *dev;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (!xuo->flags || xuo->flags & ~XFRM_OFFLOAD_FULL)
> > + /* We support only Full offload mode and it means
> > + * that user must set XFRM_OFFLOAD_FULL bit.
> > + */
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Minor nit: Please add the comment before the 'if' statement or
> use braces.
Sure, will do.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists