Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200608210058.37352-1-jarod@redhat.com> <20200610185910.48668-1-jarod@redhat.com>
 <CAL3LdT5Bo3Cca1eiGykOvPAw18oH3ePQyB0wwEUYKq5ZDHX=3g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL3LdT5Bo3Cca1eiGykOvPAw18oH3ePQyB0wwEUYKq5ZDHX=3g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Jun 2020 10:26:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKfmpSczw6P=EoxPNmG=475AHiSTzC3vzuHvFBC6=PCfXVRCSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] bonding: initial support for hardware
 crypto offload
To:     Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 6:26 AM Jeff Kirsher
<jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:18 PM Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > This is an initial functional implementation for doing pass-through of
> > hardware encryption from bonding device to capable slaves, in active-backup
> > bond setups. This was developed and tested using ixgbe-driven Intel x520
> > interfaces with libreswan and a transport mode connection, primarily using
> > netperf, with assorted connection failures forced during transmission. The
> > failover works quite well in my testing, and overall performance is right
> > on par with offload when running on a bare interface, no bond involved.
> >
> > Caveats: this is ONLY enabled for active-backup, because I'm not sure
> > how one would manage multiple offload handles for different devices all
> > running at the same time in the same xfrm, and it relies on some minor
> > changes to both the xfrm code and slave device driver code to get things
> > to behave, and I don't have immediate access to any other hardware that
> > could function similarly, but the NIC driver changes are minimal and
> > straight-forward enough that I've included what I think ought to be
> > enough for mlx5 devices too.
> >
> > v2: reordered patches, switched (back) to using CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD
> > to wrap the code additions and wrapped overlooked additions.
> >
> > Jarod Wilson (4):
> >   xfrm: bail early on slave pass over skb
> >   ixgbe_ipsec: become aware of when running as a bonding slave
> >   mlx5: become aware of when running as a bonding slave
> >   bonding: support hardware encryption offload to slaves
...
> Was this ever sent to netdev (the more appropriate ML)?

I believe so, but I'd neglected to notice net-next was closed at the
time, so I was holding on to it to resubmit once net-next is opened
back up.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com