> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>>> <snip>
> > > >>>>>>> +
> > > >>>>>>> +static int
> > > >>>>>>> +ixgbe_crypto_update_mb(void *device __rte_unused,
> > > >>>>>>> + struct rte_security_session *session,
> > > >>>>>>> + struct rte_mbuf *m, void *params __rte_unused)
> > {
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Another sort of generic question - why not make
> > > > security_set_pkt_metadata function to accept bulk of packets?
> > > > In that case o can minimize the cost of function calls, accessing
> > > > session
> > data, etc.
> > > > Though I suppose that could wait till next patch series.
> > > > Konstantin
> > > It is a good suggestion, but we need to discuss it further;
> >
> > Yes, as I said that's for future.
> >
> > > for example
> > > if it can accept a bulk of packets, will it need also a bulk of
> > > metadata pointers, or just one for all the packets?
> >
> > By metadata do you mean a session or ...?
> > Konstantin
>
> No, I mean the void *params parameter, (that was named metadata in earlier
> patches).
> >
As right now it is not used, and I don't really know how you guys foresee to
use it in future -
I don't have any strong opinion on it :)
Konstantin
