From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3FCC00140 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 01:54:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244514AbiHSByQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2022 21:54:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43952 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236015AbiHSByP (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2022 21:54:15 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9721D21E2 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2022 18:54:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C62D6141D for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 01:54:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D24BC433D7; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 01:54:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1660874053; bh=lNT/cK6JCtRVnD62+yUzQPG13QiZJhANa3a3Q/UTEkM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=t0K6N/ifPkW+GpChZgxCShhXHMhk2mqMEb5zHcZosIgdNGeS+HFmgBIL5Mj8BkaxJ C77/AVXU584wjGR55VY2YuSD9oDisZMfI7/YLwcXQT1jfBeA3ifuLTbeo7Je77PTl4 CMFivvW9sfGFI9fPsGTzw0sWjdKCMvUsUrFsJA5HrTHOWST30qz1ALnHNMSE+Jj6/j H/P0sn0InNh0t5XQNR38jh48PPQx1QITkhD2Bz3GOhvzqpj95+bPt4hWdex2aDDalA f62cMVzLNBK8peyoC0c2f32oxumv+rTHJNpDvshxXX8y6ON9KVItvi+gEL00KK0pPa uwN/vOzKbELyw== Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 18:54:12 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Steffen Klassert Cc: Leon Romanovsky , "David S . Miller" , Herbert Xu , , Raed Salem , ipsec-devel , Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v2 0/6] Extend XFRM core to allow full offload configuration Message-ID: <20220818185412.6f294cef@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20220818101031.GC566407@gauss3.secunet.de> References: <20220816195408.56eec0ed@kernel.org> <20220817111052.0ddf40b0@kernel.org> <20220818101031.GC566407@gauss3.secunet.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 12:10:31 +0200 Steffen Klassert wrote: > > > You must provide a clear analysis (as in examination in data) and > > > discussion (as in examination in writing) if you're intending to > > > change the "let's keep packet formation in the SW" policy. What you > > > got below is a good start but not sufficient. > > I'm still a bit unease about this approach. I fear that doing parts > of statefull IPsec procesing in software and parts in hardware will > lead to all sort of problems. E.g. with this implementation > the software has no stats, liftetime, lifebyte and packet count > information but is responsible to do the IKE communication. > > We might be able to sort out all problems during the upstraming > process, but I still have no clear picture how this should work > in the end with all corener cases this creates. Makes sense. I'm not sure any of the "deep and stateful offloads" we have can be considered a success so IMHO we can be selective in the approaches we accept. > Also the name full offload is a bit missleading, because the > software still has to hold all offloaded states and policies. > In a full offload, the stack would IMO just act as a stub > layer between IKE and hardware.