Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-178574-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 11:46:26 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@marvell.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@marvell.com>,
	Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@marvell.com>,
	Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta <sbhatta@marvell.com>,
	Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@marvell.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
	Linu Cherian <lcherian@marvell.com>,
	"richardcochran@gmail.com" <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [net-next,v2 5/8] cn10k-ipsec: Add SA add/delete
 support for outb inline ipsec
Message-ID: <20240514104626.GE2787@kernel.org>
References: <20240513105446.297451-1-bbhushan2@marvell.com>
 <20240513105446.297451-6-bbhushan2@marvell.com>
 <20240513165133.GS2787@kernel.org>
 <SN7PR18MB531442D0D88031D320F3372BE3E32@SN7PR18MB5314.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <SN7PR18MB531442D0D88031D320F3372BE3E32@SN7PR18MB5314.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 06:52:38AM +0000, Bharat Bhushan wrote:
> Please see inline
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>

..

> > > +static const struct xfrmdev_ops cn10k_ipsec_xfrmdev_ops = {
> > > +	.xdo_dev_state_add	= cn10k_ipsec_add_state,
> > > +	.xdo_dev_state_delete	= cn10k_ipsec_del_state,
> > > +};
> > > +
> > 
> > cn10k_ipsec_xfrmdev_ops is unused.
> > Perhaps it, along with it's callbacks,
> > should be added by the function that uses it?
> 
> I wanted to enable ipsec offload in last patch of the series 
> ("[net-next,v2 8/8] cn10k-ipsec: Enable outbound inline ipsec offload")

I appreciate the patchset being split up like this.

> Is it okay to set xfrmdev_ops in this patch without setting NETIF_F_HW_ESP (below two lines of last patch)
> +	/* Set xfrm device ops */
> +	netdev->xfrmdev_ops = &cn10k_ipsec_xfrmdev_ops;
> 
> Last patch will set below flags.
> +	netdev->hw_features |= NETIF_F_HW_ESP;
> +	netdev->hw_enc_features |= NETIF_F_HW_ESP;
> +

IMHO, yes, something like that would be fine, as long as it leads to a
working system (with a feature not enabled).  Perhaps it would be good to
include a comment in the code about this to make it clear what is going on.

..