Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] doc: add inline protocol in feature list

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>]

On 1/22/2020 9:47 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
> Hi Ferruh,
> 
> Please see inline.
> 
> Thanks,
> Anoob
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:42 PM
>> To: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>; John McNamara
>> <john.mcnamara@intel.com>; Marko Kovacevic
>> <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>
>> Cc: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>; Narayana Prasad Raju
>> Athreya <pathreya@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Subject: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: add inline protocol in feature list
>>
>> External Email
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> On 1/21/2020 5:40 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
>>> Hi Ferruh,
>>>
>>> Can you review this patch?
>>
>> Hi Anoob,
>>
>> What is the difference between "Inline crypto" in that document and this
>> "Inline protocol"? Both seems providing same outpout.
> 
> [Anoob] Yes. It is partly because the description of "inline crypto" is not accurate. The feature, "inline crypto" is not ipsec aware but would do crypto operation in the ipsec. This summary points to the security documentation for further details and that doc clearly explains the difference between both modes.
>  
>> Is there a way to differentiate them more clearly?
> 
> [Anoob] There are two options I can think of,
> 1. Update the feature list to describe the difference between the two. Have a line like,
> 	"As compared to inline crypto, inline protocol will handle the entire protocol offload in addition to the crypto operation."
> 2. Both inline crypto and inline protocol falls under security. So could even rename "Inline crypto" to "Inline security offload" and we should be good to go. Also, under inline protocol, there are various protocols possible. Say, tomorrow when we add MACSEC support, the same question would arise (as in whether it's a new feature or would it be under "inline protocol").

Hi Anoob,

These seems security related and I don't know enough to comment if this is
correct thing to do. I have cc'ed a few more people for comment.

@Akhil, would you mind if I assign this to you?

Thanks,
ferruh

>  
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Anoob
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Anoob Joseph
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2019 12:23 PM
>>>> To: John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>; Marko Kovacevic
>>>> <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>; Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
>>>> <jerinj@marvell.com>; Narayana Prasad Raju Athreya
>>>> <pathreya@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: add inline protocol in feature list
>>>>
>>>> Update feature list to include inline protocol offload.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  doc/guides/nics/features.rst         | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini |  1 +
>>>>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
>>>> b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst index
>>>> 8394a65..f4eb2a9 100644
>>>> --- a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
>>>> @@ -433,6 +433,24 @@ Supports inline crypto processing (e.g. inline
>>>> IPsec). See Security library and
>>>>    ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD``,
>>>> ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD_FAILED``.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +.. _nic_features_inline_protocol_doc:
>>>> +
>>>> +Inline protocol
>>>> +---------------
>>>> +
>>>> +Supports inline protocol processing (e.g. inline IPsec). See
>>>> +Security library and
>>>> PMD documentation for more details.
>>>> +
>>>> +* **[uses]       rte_eth_rxconf,rte_eth_rxmode**:
>>>> ``offloads:DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY``,
>>>> +* **[uses]       rte_eth_txconf,rte_eth_txmode**:
>>>> ``offloads:DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY``.
>>>> +* **[implements] rte_security_ops**: ``session_create``,
>>>> +``session_update``,
>>>> +  ``session_stats_get``, ``session_destroy``, ``set_pkt_metadata``,
>>>> +``get_userdata``,
>>>> +  ``capabilities_get``.
>>>> +* **[provides] rte_eth_dev_info**:
>>>>
>> +``rx_offload_capa,rx_queue_offload_capa:DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY``,
>>>> +
>> ``tx_offload_capa,tx_queue_offload_capa:DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY``.
>>>> +* **[provides]   mbuf**: ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD``,
>>>> +  ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD``,
>>>> ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD_FAILED``.
>>>> +
>>>> +
>>>>  .. _nic_features_crc_offload:
>>>>
>>>>  CRC offload
>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini
>>>> b/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini
>>>> index 91ec619..4d0ad32 100644
>>>> --- a/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini
>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/features/default.ini
>>>> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ Flow API             =
>>>>  Rate limitation      =
>>>>  Traffic mirroring    =
>>>>  Inline crypto        =
>>>> +Inline protocol      =
>>>>  CRC offload          =
>>>>  VLAN offload         =
>>>>  QinQ offload         =
>>>> --
>>>> 2.7.4
>>>
>