On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 07:51:24AM +0000, Ilan Tayari wrote: > > From: Jason Gunthorpe [mailto:jgunthorpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Subject: Re: [for-next 4/6] net/mlx5: FPGA, Add basic support for Innova > > > > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 04:09:06PM +0000, Ilan Tayari wrote: > > > > > > For IPSec, this is already in the kernel. > > > > See this patchset: > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg162876.html > > > > > > Sorry, I pointed at the RFC by mistake. > > > > > > This is the relevant pull request: > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/752707/ > > > > This is connecting ipsec to a netdev, while Innova seems to be a > > Jason, > > "network connected ipsec accelerator configured using IP packets." > No. This is incorrect. > Where did you get that from? That is what you described to me - you said the only way to configure the FPGA was via IP packets in-band. It is not part of the NIC and the NIC only loads the FPGA bitstream. Maybe you should explain more how this works? > So you configure it from userspace with regular IPSec 'ip xfrm > state' commands or over netlink with your favorite IKE daemon. But you don't give an ip xfrm configuration to the NIC when you submit the work request? By your description it sounded liked the FPGA pattern matches packets from the NIC side to apply the xfrm. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
