I think there's general agreement that the crypto APIs should be improved
for Tiger Moth in a few areas such as adding support for additional
capabilities (e.g., Barry's PKI proposal) as well as flow routing for
protocol offload. We just need specific proposals to discuss. It's not too
soon to start posting RFCs or proposed patches for these, so please do so.

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Nikhil Agarwal <[email protected]>
wrote:

> One use case that will benefit from it will be fat ipsec tunnel use case,
> where majority of packets coming from one pktio interface belongs to same
> sessions. In general, it can be used in case where we are doing batch
> processing using burst rx/tx apis(odp_pktio_recv/tx with more than one
> packet)  and multiple packet needs crypto operations.
>
> I dont have API changes as of now, but that can be proposed if people
> agree.
>
> Regards
> Nikhil
>
> On 10 May 2016 at 21:03, Bala Manoharan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Do you have any specific changes or additions to crypto API? or any
>> specific use-case which might benefit from the additional API?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bala
>>
>> On 10 May 2016 at 20:50, Nikhil Agarwal <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Since we have multi flavor for packet Rx/Tx APIs on queues and
>>> scheduler, shall we have have a similar API  for crypto operation? It might
>>> save significant CPU cycles for implementation having hardware engines. Any
>>> thoughts?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Nikhil
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lng-odp mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lng-odp mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
>
>
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp

Reply via email to