From: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>,
Vamsi Krishna Attunuru <vattunuru@marvell.com>,
"techboard@dpdk.org" <techboard@dpdk.org>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4] examples/l2fwd-macsec: add MACsec forwarding application
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 05:03:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CO6PR18MB44840C727136FFEC127466CFD8B3A@CO6PR18MB4484.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14164652.lVVuGzaMjS@thomas>
> Hi Akhil,
>
> 09/11/2023 22:01, Akhil Goyal:
> > Added a new application based on l2fwd to demonstrate inline protocol
> > offload MACsec performance using rte_security APIs.
>
> In general we try to avoid adding a new example application.
> Does this one has been discussed already with the techboard?
> We need a good justification for an exception.
> Why not merging it in l2fwd-crypto?
>
L2fwd-crypto is based on rte_crypto sessions and
l2fwd-macsec is based on rte_security session.
We have application for IPsec, and adding a new one for MACsec is also fine in my opinion.
We can add more MACsec protocol stuff in the new application in future.
The goal is to have a full-fledged MACsec application like ipsec-secgw.
But while adding in l2fwd-crypto will limit us from adding protocol stuff in it.
L2fwd-crypto is a very basic benchmarking application with no
Protocol stuff/checks to get maximum raw crypto performance.
Adding MACsec in it would corrupt its basic nature.
The application is not discussed in techboard
but the patch is there on ML for more than 3 months with no comments.
If we have objections, we can push it for next release or else
it would be good to add it in current release only.
The patch is pushed to crypto tree for now as we have RC3 deadline today.
You may remove the patch while pulling on main.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-13 5:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-27 13:20 [PATCH] " Akhil Goyal
2023-10-31 18:44 ` [PATCH v2] " Akhil Goyal
2023-11-03 7:32 ` [PATCH v3] " Akhil Goyal
2023-11-09 21:01 ` [PATCH v4] " Akhil Goyal
2023-11-09 22:28 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-11-13 5:03 ` Akhil Goyal [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CO6PR18MB44840C727136FFEC127466CFD8B3A@CO6PR18MB4484.namprd18.prod.outlook.com \
--to=gakhil@marvell.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=techboard@dpdk.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=vattunuru@marvell.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).