From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 618EB346AF1 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 23:08:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.156 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774307309; cv=none; b=W5m6UwTW0cwhTZAWOATlQ4NQb6DnE6O1IAp/lJKZKZ0T4dBCXyzjIxRCJAo8XXCoK/K9CGzxYvR4qgkt733DR24PpA8n5Ooe3OsymUIEtulpc/uvK7yNM6zGgRC6PrQKuWqZIwJ7tpbM7XDffyNayxWZLFWQyp2caeVv+83oxb4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774307309; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RnfdW/9pBIpKQVUicB6bsMgC6DCsPPoPFYdYVOYBrPw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=G6FfP8gpQpJLDMpk8zXu6TQmPXhUK/iE20ofEALDDUDXXUvStjxxbyzYSgXaYYHHMCeORR9+sDJhGZJMQuSisNLjnmtcLw9iuh/tm1MPs5umSndxIcuNkj0pVQZj6DpaNOJbCs6RLClLYoXmNAavdv6OyjppsPqbz6jASF85uG0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b=vSYGVvmo; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=Yi0gZHbz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.156 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b="vSYGVvmo"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="Yi0gZHbz" Received: from phl-compute-01.internal (phl-compute-01.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88304140023C; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 19:08:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-04 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-01.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 23 Mar 2026 19:08:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=queasysnail.net; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1774307306; x= 1774393706; bh=kNO80lxUmDbPxGe1NY815tnXyLm4pm/WkvKISCnpC6M=; b=v SYGVvmokV8lJJRtCDXzYuM1s/FmgkNZOs1fiL8zCfnw62GMEaVYGEs2ypzr+lEb+ 4o4rOf4ohFRQlyBRMR/4Ge/lKRv48It7zSJKTupx6/Frzqef3DD4lb8Zjs48GNYO 9Bk+wsZkoAW887O3Gy8gM1EtDtFUU1f1csEE8I6QJwXbSTYaEHi0O9dnnkr4kw1n uiK87tW1a5+iM6Xve8uSjgN71m/7OWzweX/4fQMf+jXpPdwFUrxudnht4DzZAH+c pPusl3QaczXlkXS3zSL+n0Q8IDURTFxZKPZHt96dZYKJ7qXX6w+zPqYIYZ1lWnT1 HxUbkuE45Oqet+HZU0KJw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1774307306; x=1774393706; bh=kNO80lxUmDbPxGe1NY815tnXyLm4pm/WkvK ISCnpC6M=; b=Yi0gZHbzXd2+y3It+vT6cVyZcF+X6eou4vm1faYEJGmRtJxdPfJ rzwKfnYlHf/QXfnNhJyN0fq6vqX4TT6CkP5wAR2WVrKk7Y+9xpz3WhphOWDVs+7i yXgJujls/AKAYxfSsSUMmSDhNnTaU6x+dexxeJ04jr+7H9ka/wmqs6nmUZ3FIaab Gi6R1KRSjJQm5jQfinQMuJe7KBiDwsooEG0Rz2qA+LV5pDAa+Tp1MR91B9idZ1W+ ZqGoXQMvtsPQU+RhWHznlv6HSfsgnhlZ4/YpaL5s+fvEESmfs/KIXilt5ZFa6L6W ++N0vYOmbYv8T746LdzJQJL1b1X3uqH15pQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefgedrtddtgdefudelleelucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtjeenucfhrhhomhepufgrsghrihhn rgcuffhusghrohgtrgcuoehsugesqhhuvggrshihshhnrghilhdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrf grthhtvghrnhepuefhhfffgfffhfefueeiudegtdefhfekgeetheegheeifffguedvueff fefgudffnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epshgusehquhgvrghshihsnhgrihhlrdhnvghtpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeejpdhmohgu vgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopegtvghlsehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtph htthhopehjohhhnhdrfhgrshhtrggsvghnugesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthho pehkuhgsrgeskhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepnhgvthguvghvsehvghgvrh drkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepkhgvrhhnvghlqdhtlhhsqdhhrghnughs hhgrkhgvsehlihhsthhsrdhlihhnuhigrdguvghvpdhrtghpthhtoheptghhuhgtkhdrlh gvvhgvrhesohhrrggtlhgvrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohephhgrrhgvsehsuhhsvgdruggv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i934648bf:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 19:08:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:08:24 +0100 From: Sabrina Dubroca To: Chuck Lever Cc: john.fastabend@gmail.com, Jakub Kicinski , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev, Chuck Lever , Hannes Reinecke Subject: Re: [PATCH PATCH net-next v4 8/8] tls: Enable batch async decryption in read_sock Message-ID: References: <20260317-tls-read-sock-v4-0-ab1086ec600f@oracle.com> <20260317-tls-read-sock-v4-8-ab1086ec600f@oracle.com> <5190a4bf-cc66-424e-9c67-ffb3ddb58030@app.fastmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5190a4bf-cc66-424e-9c67-ffb3ddb58030@app.fastmail.com> 2026-03-23, 11:04:16 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026, at 10:14 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > 2026-03-17, 11:04:21 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > >> +/* Bound on concurrent async AEAD submissions per read_sock > >> + * call. Chosen to fill typical hardware crypto pipelines > >> + * without excessive memory consumption (each in-flight record > >> + * holds one cleartext skb plus its AEAD request context). > >> + */ > >> +#define TLS_READ_SOCK_BATCH 16 > > > > I suspect that at some point, we'll have a request to make this > > configurable (maybe system-wide, maybe by socket?). > > I appreciate your careful and close review. The series has > improved significantly. > > I will admit that the current value (16) is arbitrary. I agree > that someone might want to modify this value. At this point, > however, the constant is straightforward and it is still quite > easy to promote to a tunable later if that proves to be needed. Agreed. > The right interface for this depends on kTLS consumer needs > that aren't clear (to me) yet. In this case (read_sock), the kTLS consumer is NVMe/TCP etc, and specifically users of those features with crypto acceleration cards. I'm not familiar with either. > But let me know if you have a > preferred API mechanism or a specific use case in mind, or if > there is a netdev policy that should guide the introduction > of a suitable API for this purpose. Nothing specific, I just thought I'd mention it since I was replying to the patch anyway. I think at this stage "it seems easy to promote to a tunable later" is enough consideration (just to avoid getting trapped in some API (or lack thereof) and unable to change it, but I agree that it shouldn't be a problem here). -- Sabrina