From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from new3-smtp.messagingengine.com (new3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.229]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8504A2BD8 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:15:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A7C1246D; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:15:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:15:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=nNNMaGTqjSWz7C8EnS13i4mxT1h+g6rkgQV6HnIQ1h8=; b=cxZ1nnEJklE2 vCKYhqyftUQ3r0b/B4tfAH3CTkpFUHwWjEtYvKda9BnUpEM8V8wKOCk3D1TPCep5 sSuBPer8XXV2/x9dSB3yo+c76eF1C/K0pQU/U6v5At8WDhrjYDLjTFptge/kQB9J G+8rBIoWa4DplE4eGyoVI+7lPoSKGb4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=nNNMaGTqjSWz7C8EnS13i4mxT1h+g6rkgQV6HnIQ1 h8=; b=GBzaIcsffnMNC3XL+cgBL5JBkDN1Vuc77D1457tIwGx4JHoEwTKaUXnGJ z37zgpxwBBTxqubsyrZIYqJLZ0ZvSM5xucOOaTIgTlhF5gYGGnCX28RrS8oClj6l P2ATuJMAcrQYYUjcK5AgsVW5Ewq8+LdyuwMGemE6phhZo1TW01AxTh6WQgC3cVIW 2P/DGWxFAunKyg/EN6bQxYn//UEEsTTzxp9iWjdXE51t7J1KXBkvV1e4e8n99NkI vK9di5oDS5IDAY6TjiePibtIzCP5WPOtSXwCpgbN6xahfmMeTucohgbL6cRgS4ut cVbT4z9f6vjg5O3stjH3vlXnwj0Rw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrudelgdduheelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 86CB1103AA; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:15:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Igor Russkikh Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Pavel Belous , Wenzhuo Lu , Jingjing Wu , Bernard Iremonger , John McNamara , Marko Kovacevic , Konstantin Ananyev , Ferruh Yigit , Andrew Rybchenko , akhil.goyal@nxp.com Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:15:25 +0200 Message-ID: <10808776.O5mG4nBl1r@xps> In-Reply-To: <08386e6f-6ca6-090e-0daa-e290a63016bd@aquantia.com> References: <4884329.guv13JCZ2K@xps> <08386e6f-6ca6-090e-0daa-e290a63016bd@aquantia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 01/10] ethdev: introduce MACSEC device ops X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 21:15:30 -0000 11/04/2019 14:37, Igor Russkikh: > On 10.04.2019 14:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 10/04/2019 13:18, Igor Russkikh: > >> MACSEC related device ops, API and parameters are taken from the > >> existing ixgbe PMD ops > > > > Please can you explain how it is related to rte_security? > > It is not. > Do you mean macsec control API could be moved and logically be a part of rte_security api? > I can't comment now on how feasible is this. Moreover this depends on how Intel considers > and uses the existing macsec offload in ixgbe. There are RTE_SECURITY_PROTOCOL_MACSEC and rte_security_macsec_* structs in librte_security. Please check how it can be used while defining an ethdev API. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8752BA0096 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:15:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E37B3772; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:15:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from new3-smtp.messagingengine.com (new3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.229]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8504A2BD8 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:15:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A7C1246D; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:15:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:15:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=nNNMaGTqjSWz7C8EnS13i4mxT1h+g6rkgQV6HnIQ1h8=; b=cxZ1nnEJklE2 vCKYhqyftUQ3r0b/B4tfAH3CTkpFUHwWjEtYvKda9BnUpEM8V8wKOCk3D1TPCep5 sSuBPer8XXV2/x9dSB3yo+c76eF1C/K0pQU/U6v5At8WDhrjYDLjTFptge/kQB9J G+8rBIoWa4DplE4eGyoVI+7lPoSKGb4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=nNNMaGTqjSWz7C8EnS13i4mxT1h+g6rkgQV6HnIQ1 h8=; b=GBzaIcsffnMNC3XL+cgBL5JBkDN1Vuc77D1457tIwGx4JHoEwTKaUXnGJ z37zgpxwBBTxqubsyrZIYqJLZ0ZvSM5xucOOaTIgTlhF5gYGGnCX28RrS8oClj6l P2ATuJMAcrQYYUjcK5AgsVW5Ewq8+LdyuwMGemE6phhZo1TW01AxTh6WQgC3cVIW 2P/DGWxFAunKyg/EN6bQxYn//UEEsTTzxp9iWjdXE51t7J1KXBkvV1e4e8n99NkI vK9di5oDS5IDAY6TjiePibtIzCP5WPOtSXwCpgbN6xahfmMeTucohgbL6cRgS4ut cVbT4z9f6vjg5O3stjH3vlXnwj0Rw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrudelgdduheelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 86CB1103AA; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:15:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Igor Russkikh Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Pavel Belous , Wenzhuo Lu , Jingjing Wu , Bernard Iremonger , John McNamara , Marko Kovacevic , Konstantin Ananyev , Ferruh Yigit , Andrew Rybchenko , akhil.goyal@nxp.com Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:15:25 +0200 Message-ID: <10808776.O5mG4nBl1r@xps> In-Reply-To: <08386e6f-6ca6-090e-0daa-e290a63016bd@aquantia.com> References: <4884329.guv13JCZ2K@xps> <08386e6f-6ca6-090e-0daa-e290a63016bd@aquantia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 01/10] ethdev: introduce MACSEC device ops X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Message-ID: <20190411211525.vfK-8Q5Nw3kHGRq-XBxVGiY0zrjgA6dt8CPjPN6dolg@z> 11/04/2019 14:37, Igor Russkikh: > On 10.04.2019 14:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 10/04/2019 13:18, Igor Russkikh: > >> MACSEC related device ops, API and parameters are taken from the > >> existing ixgbe PMD ops > > > > Please can you explain how it is related to rte_security? > > It is not. > Do you mean macsec control API could be moved and logically be a part of rte_security api? > I can't comment now on how feasible is this. Moreover this depends on how Intel considers > and uses the existing macsec offload in ixgbe. There are RTE_SECURITY_PROTOCOL_MACSEC and rte_security_macsec_* structs in librte_security. Please check how it can be used while defining an ethdev API.