netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v1 06/10] net/mlx5e: Support IPsec TX packet offload in tunnel mode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230418075802.GC9740@unreal>
Date:   Tue, 18 Apr 2023 10:58:02 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Raed Salem <raeds@...dia.com>, Emeel Hakim <ehakim@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 06/10] net/mlx5e: Support IPsec TX packet
 offload in tunnel mode

On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 09:09:13AM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 09:48:27AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 03:23:55PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 03:29:24PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Extend mlx5 driver with logic to support IPsec TX packet offload
> > > > in tunnel mode.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> > 
> > <...>
> > 
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_accel/ipsec.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_accel/ipsec.c
> > > > @@ -271,6 +271,18 @@ static void mlx5e_ipsec_init_macs(struct mlx5e_ipsec_sa_entry *sa_entry,
> > > >  		neigh_ha_snapshot(addr, n, netdev);
> > > >  		ether_addr_copy(attrs->smac, addr);
> > > >  		break;
> > > > +	case XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_OUT:
> > > > +		ether_addr_copy(attrs->smac, addr);
> > > > +		n = neigh_lookup(&arp_tbl, &attrs->daddr.a4, netdev);
> > > > +		if (!n) {
> > > > +			n = neigh_create(&arp_tbl, &attrs->daddr.a4, netdev);
> > > > +			if (IS_ERR(n))
> > > > +				return;
> > > > +			neigh_event_send(n, NULL);
> > > > +		}
> > > > +		neigh_ha_snapshot(addr, n, netdev);
> > > > +		ether_addr_copy(attrs->dmac, addr);
> > > > +		break;
> > > 
> > > I see no problem with the above code.
> > > However, it does seem very similar to the code for the previous case,
> > > XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_IN. Perhaps this could be refactored somehow.
> > 
> > Yes, it can be refactored to something like this:
> 
> Thanks Leon,
> 
> this looks good to me.

Awesome, will prepare patch, test and send.

Thanks