From: Atul Gupta Subject: Re: [RFC crypto v3 0/9] Chelsio Inline TLS Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:42:00 +0530 Message-ID: References: <1513769582-25786-1-git-send-email-atul.gupta@chelsio.com> <20180121221602.GA527@bistromath.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, ganeshgr@chelsio.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, davejwatson@fb.com To: Sabrina Dubroca Return-path: Received: from stargate.chelsio.com ([12.32.117.8]:47390 "EHLO stargate.chelsio.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750907AbeAWIMQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2018 03:12:16 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20180121221602.GA527@bistromath.localdomain> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 22 January 2018 03:46 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > 2017-12-20, 17:03:02 +0530, Atul Gupta wrote: >> RFC series for Chelsio Inline TLS driver (chtls.ko) >> >> Driver use the ULP infrastructure to register chtls as Inline TLS ULP. > I don't think drivers should be registering their own ULP. TLS > offloading should be transparent to userspace, whatever HW ends up > being used. If each driver implements its own ULP, the application has > to be aware of what HW and what driver it's running on. using different ULP is derived from https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9746381/ > I think this offload should rely on a generic infrastructure, not > build its own private interface. Look at the current kTLS code, the > proposal for an offload infrastructure [0] from Mellanox, and see how > you can fit your driver into that, and extend what's missing. > > [0] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/849984/ The driver indeed used the proposed offload infrastructure and extended for Inline Rx/Tx > > > [...] >> Atul Gupta (9): >> chtls: structure and macro definiton >> cxgb4: Inline TLS FW Interface >> cxgb4: LLD driver changes to enable TLS >> chcr: Key Macro >> chtls: Key program >> chtls: CPL handler definition >> chtls: Inline crypto request Tx/Rx >> chtls: Register the ULP >> Makefile Kconfig > That patchset is split so that each patch touches a separate set of > files, and the description of the contents of each patch is very > limited. Can you try to group your changes by feature instead? That > should help you come up with descriptive commit messages as well. Made all attempts to group the contents based on functionality, the set is broken into driver registration, I/O with crypto Inline request, key handling and messages exchanged with hardware. > > Thanks, >