On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 07:31:24AM +0000, Ilya Lesokhin wrote: > On Mon, Monday, December 18, 2017 9:54 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 01:10:33PM +0200, Ilya Lesokhin wrote: > > > This patch adds a generic infrastructure to offload TLS crypto to a > > > network devices. It enables the kernel TLS socket to skip encryption > > > and authentication operations on the transmit side of the data path. > > > Leaving those computationally expensive operations to the NIC. > > > > I have a hard time understanding why this was named 'tls_device' if no > > net_device's are registered. > > > I'm not quite sure what you mean by "no net_device's are registered" > Presumably you mean there is no device that implements the > NETIF_F_HW_TLS_TX capability yet.
Not really. Let me try again. This patchset is using the expression "tls_device". When I read that, I expect a new interface type, like a tunnel, that would be created on top of another interface that has the offloading capability. That's why I'm confused. IMHO "tls_offload" is a better fit. Makes sense? > I'll just say that the IPSEC device offload infrastructure was also submitted > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d77e38e612a017480157fe6d2c1422f42cb5b7e3 > before the first implementation > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/bebb23e6cb02d2fc752905e39d09ff6152852c6c > > And we did provide a link to an implementation > https://github.com/Mellanox/tls-offload/tree/tls_device_v3 > for people who want to take a look. > Unfortunately it is not ready for upstream submission yet Yep, although I still have to get there. Thanks, Marcelo
