[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y4xTkImiAiXavCAN@unreal>
Date:   Sun, 4 Dec 2022 10:00:16 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v10 0/8] Extend XFRM core to allow packet
 offload configuration
On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 08:41:26PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> 
> The following series extends XFRM core code to handle a new type of IPsec
> offload - packet offload.
<...>
> Leon Romanovsky (8):
>   xfrm: add new packet offload flag
>   xfrm: allow state packet offload mode
>   xfrm: add an interface to offload policy
>   xfrm: add TX datapath support for IPsec packet offload mode
>   xfrm: add RX datapath protection for IPsec packet offload mode
>   xfrm: speed-up lookup of HW policies
>   xfrm: add support to HW update soft and hard limits
>   xfrm: document IPsec packet offload mode
Hi Steffen,
Like we discussed on v9 of this series, I do prefer to see this code
merged before merge window. It will simplify so much for me, like
UAPI exposure for iproute2 and *swan* forks. The internal API for
our mlx5 refactoring e.t.c.
The code in our regression is all time and it is completely safe for any
non-packet offload devices.
Thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
