All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, borisp@mellanox.com, declan.doherty@intel.com,
	radu.nicolau@intel.com, aviadye@mellanox.com,
	sandeep.malik@nxp.com, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com,
	pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 16:49:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2166799.Q9jkndJmdM@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170725112153.29699-1-akhil.goyal@nxp.com>

Hi,

I try to understand how things are connected,
but too many things are not clear for someone not involved in security.

25/07/2017 13:21, Akhil Goyal:
> struct rte_security_session *
> rte_security_session_create(struct rte_mempool *mempool);

What is the usage of this mempool?

[...]
> These are very similar to what Declan proposed with a few additions.
> This can be updated further for other security protocols like MACSec and DTLS

You should avoid referencing another proposal without
- link to the proposal
- summary of the proposal

[...]
> Now, after the application configures the session using above APIs, it needs to
> attach the  session with the crypto_op in case the session is configured for
> crypto look aside protocol offload. For IPSec inline/ full protocol offload
> using NIC, the mbuf ol_flags can be set as per the RFC suggested by Boris.

Again a missing reference (link + summary).

Even worst, the RFCv2 references this v1 without copying the explanations.
It is too hard to track, or maybe it is cryptic on purpose ;)

[...]
> Now the application(ipsec-secgw) have 4 paths to decide for the data path.
> 1. Non-protocol offload (currently implemented)
> 2. IPSec inline(only crypto operations using NIC)
> 3. full protocol offload(crypto operations along with all the IPsec header
>    and trailer processing using NIC)
> 4. look aside protocol offload(single-pass encryption and authentication with
>    additional levels of protocol processing offload using crypto device)

I feel these 4 paths are the most important to discuss.
Unfortunately there are not enough detailed.
Please explain the purpose and implementation of each one.

> The application can decide using the below action types
> enum rte_security_session_action_type {
>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_ETH_INLINE_CRYPTO,
>         /**< Crypto operations are performed by Network interface */

In this mode, the ethdev port does the same thing as a crypto port?

>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_ETH_PROTO_OFFLOAD,
>         /**< Crypto operations with protocol support are performed
>          * by Network/ethernet device.
>          */
>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_CRYPTO_PROTO_OFFLOAD,
>         /**< Crypto operations with protocol support are performed
>          * by Crypto device.
>          */

I guess the difference between ETH_PROTO_OFFLOAD and CRYPTO_PROTO_OFFLOAD
is that we must re-inject packets from CRYPTO_PROTO_OFFLOAD to the NIC?

>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_NONE
> 	/**< Non protocol offload. Application need to manage everything */
> };

What RTE_SECURITY_SESS_NONE does? It is said to be implemented above.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-08-29 14:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-10  7:35 [RFC 0/7] ipsec inline Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [RFC 1/7] ethdev: add device ipsec encrypt/decrypt capability flags Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [RFC 2/7] ethdev: Add ESP header to generic flow steering Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [RFC 3/7] ethdev: add rte flow action for crypto Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [RFC 4/7] cryptodev: add ipsec xform Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [RFC 5/7] mbuf: Add IPsec crypto flags Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [RFC 6/7] mbuf: Added next_esp_proto field Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [RFC 7/7] example/ipsec_gw: Support SA offload in datapath Boris Pismenny
2017-07-11 17:06 ` [RFC 0/7] ipsec inline Declan Doherty
2017-07-12 14:08   ` Boris Pismenny
2017-07-14 11:12   ` Akhil Goyal
2017-07-25 11:21     ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload Akhil Goyal
2017-07-25 11:21       ` [RFC PATCH 1/1] rte_security: proposal Akhil Goyal
2017-07-26 13:46       ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload Declan Doherty
2017-08-02 13:16         ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-08-03 11:25           ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35       ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] " Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] rte_security: API definitions Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15 11:04           ` Radu Nicolau
2017-08-16  7:39             ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-16 15:40               ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-08-18  9:16                 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-18 12:20                   ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-08-21 10:32                   ` Boris Pismenny
2017-08-21 10:54                     ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] cryptodev: entend cryptodev to support security APIs Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] crypto/dpaa2_sec: add support for protocol offload ipsec Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] example/ipsec-secgw: add support for offloading crypto op Akhil Goyal
2017-08-29 14:49       ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2017-08-31  9:37         ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload Akhil Goyal
2017-08-31 10:06           ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-31 10:52             ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-31 13:14               ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-31 14:09                 ` Radu Nicolau
2017-09-06 15:53                   ` Jerin Jacob
2017-09-08 11:12                     ` Akhil Goyal
2017-09-11 18:10                       ` Jerin Jacob

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2166799.Q9jkndJmdM@xps \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
    --cc=aviadye@mellanox.com \
    --cc=borisp@mellanox.com \
    --cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
    --cc=radu.nicolau@intel.com \
    --cc=sandeep.malik@nxp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.