netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 00/11] net: introduce TX shaping H/W offload API

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: <5fb64fb5-df6d-409f-b6c6-7930678df9d2@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 16:42:19 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Madhu Chittim <madhu.chittim@...el.com>,
 Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
 Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
 Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>,
 Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 00/11] net: introduce TX shaping H/W offload API

On 7/29/24 08:30, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>  From what I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong, this
> patchset is about HW shaper configuration. Basically it provides new UAPI
> to configure the HW shaper. So Why you say "offload"? I don't see
> anything being offloaded here.

The offload part comes from the initial, very old tentative solution. I 
guess we can change the title to "net: introduce TX H/W shaping API"

> Also, from the previous discussions, I gained impression that the goal
> of this work is to replace multiple driver apis for the shaper and
> consolidate it under new one. I don't see anything like this in this
> patchset. Do you plan it as a follow-up? Do you have RFC for that step
> as well?

The general idea is, with time, to leverage this API to replace others 
H/W shaping related in-kernel interfaces.

At least ndo_set_tx_maxrate() should be quite straight-forward, after 
that the relevant device drivers have implemented (very limited) support 
for this API.

The latter will need some effort from the drivers' owners.

Thanks,

Paolo