On 01/30/18 06:51 AM, Atul Gupta wrote: > What I was referring is that passing "tls" ulp type in setsockopt > may be insufficient to make the decision when multi HW assist Inline > TLS solution exists. Setting the ULP doesn't choose HW or SW implementation, I think that should be done later when setting up crypto with setsockopt(SOL_TLS, TLS_TX, struct crypto_info). Any reason we can't use ethtool to choose HW vs SW implementation, if available on the device? > Some HW may go beyond defining sendmsg/sendpage of the prot and > require additional info to setup the env? Also, we need to keep > vendor specific code out of tls_main.c i.e anything other than > base/sw_tx prot perhaps go to hw driver. Sure, but I think we can add hooks to tls_main to do this without a new ULP.
