On 1/26/2018 8:38 PM, Nicolau, Radu wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Anoob Joseph [mailto:anoob.jos...@caviumnetworks.com]
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 2:38 PM
To: Nicolau, Radu <radu.nico...@intel.com>; Akhil Goyal
<akhil.go...@nxp.com>
Cc: anoob.jos...@caviumnetworks.com; Doherty, Declan
<declan.dohe...@intel.com>; Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio
<sergio.gonzalez.mon...@intel.com>; Jerin Jacob
<jerin.ja...@caviumnetworks.com>; Narayana Prasad
<narayanaprasad.athr...@caviumnetworks.com>; Nelio Laranjeiro
<nelio.laranje...@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] set protocol specific metadata using set_pkt_metadata
API
Hi Radu,
On 01/26/2018 04:52 PM, Nicolau, Radu wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Anoob Joseph [mailto:anoob.jos...@caviumnetworks.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 5:13 PM
To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.go...@nxp.com>; Nicolau, Radu
<radu.nico...@intel.com>
Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.dohe...@intel.com>; Gonzalez Monroy,
Sergio <sergio.gonzalez.mon...@intel.com>;
anoob.jos...@caviumnetworks.com; Jerin Jacob
<jerin.ja...@caviumnetworks.com>; Narayana Prasad
<narayanaprasad.athr...@caviumnetworks.com>; Nelio Laranjeiro
<nelio.laranje...@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] set protocol specific metadata using
set_pkt_metadata API
Hi Akhil, Radu,
Could you review the patch and share your thoughts on the proposed
change?
Hi,
I've had a quick look. From what I can see you can do everything you do in
this patch with the current API. For example you can store an internal struct
pointer in the private section of the security context and you can increment
the ESP SN with every tx or set metadata call.
With the current API, PMD could store the ESN with the security session, but
there is no means for the application to read this. Application should be
aware of the sequence number used per packet. This is required to monitor
sequence number overflow.In the proposal, the sequence number field is
IN-OUT. So application could either dictate the sequence number, or read
the value from the PMD.
Thanks,
Anoob
My concern is that we are adding too much and too specific to the security API.
Overflow situation can be monitored with a tx callback event or a crypto
callback event, depending on the device type.
Agreed with Radu, this looks too specific information.
Instead, we can do overflow checking in the driver and add a macro in
rte_crypto_op_status for overflow.
-Akhil
