On 01/31/18 04:14 PM, Atul Gupta wrote: > > > On Tuesday 30 January 2018 10:41 PM, Dave Watson wrote: > > 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). > setsockpot [mentioned above] is quite late for driver to enable HW > implementation, we require something as early as tls_init [setsockopt(sock, > SOL_TCP, TCP_ULP, "tls", sizeof("tls"))], for driver to set HW prot and > offload connection beside Inline Tx/Rx. > > > > Any reason we can't use ethtool to choose HW vs SW implementation, if > > available on the device? > Thought about it, the interface index is not available to fetch netdev and > caps check to set HW prot eg. bind [prot.hash] --> tls_hash to program HW. Perhaps this is the part I don't follow - why do you need to override hash and check for LISTEN? I briefly looked through the patch named "CPL handler definition", this looks like it is a full TCP offload?