-Original Message-
From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Dmitry
Eremin-Solenikov
Sent: 16 May 2017 09:09
To: lng-odp-forward
Subject: [lng-odp] Per-packet IV specification
Hello,
I'd like to clarify the crypto API vs the case of per-packet IV specificatio
Hello,
I'd like to clarify the crypto API vs the case of per-packet IV
specification. Is it expected to have meaningful iv.length be specified
at session creation time (with NULL == iv.data)?
Current linux-generic crypto code expects that if (NULL == iv.data) then
also (0 == iv.length).
Two poss
From: Yi He
This is not the kernel, ignore these preferences
Signed-off-by: Yi He
---
/** Email created from pull request 30 (heyi-linaro:checkpatch-format)
** https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/30
** Patch: https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/30.patch
** Base sha: 160f71a48b5891b49a84cc849f0
This is not the kernel, ignore these preferences
Signed-off-by: Yi He yi...@linaro.org
github
/** Email created from pull request 30 (heyi-linaro:checkpatch-format)
** https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/30
** Patch: https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/30.pa
From: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
Add function implementing memset and memcmp on packet object.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
---
/** Email created from pull request 18 (lumag:packet-zero)
** https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/18
** Patch: https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/18.patch
**
Add API call to zero part of the packet across segments.
github
/** Email created from pull request 18 (lumag:packet-zero)
** https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/18
** Patch: https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/18.patch
** Base sha: 900dd9e2d3d2ae751ab2bc4e
Branch: refs/heads/master
Home: https://github.com/Linaro/odp
Commit: 160f71a48b5891b49a84cc849f08c1ff99d26b3f
https://github.com/Linaro/odp/commit/160f71a48b5891b49a84cc849f08c1ff99d26b3f
Author: Dmitriy Krot
Date: 2017-05-15 (Mon, 15 May 2017)
Changed paths:
M platfor
On 15.05.2017 15:21, Peltonen, Janne (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote:
>
> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>>
>> Add an explicit note telling that soft_exp bits are set only once, for
>> the packet actually crossing the boundary. They will not be set for
>> further packets.
>
> Isn't this perhaps a bit t
On 15.05.2017 15:42, Balakrishna Garapati wrote:
> This change is needed to support dpdk crypto pmd's
Could you please be more specific, what are you trying to express. If
you need, you can provide several entries, one for each IV len.
>
> Signed-off-by: Balakrishna Garapati
> ---
> include/od
There is a v2 (and soon a v3).
On 15 May 2017 at 16:27, Peltonen, Janne (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
wrote:
>
> Bogdan Pricope wrote:
>> On 10 May 2017 at 20:06, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> -Original Message-
>> >> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.lina
Bogdan Pricope wrote:
> On 10 May 2017 at 20:06, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of
> >> Bogdan Pricope
> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 4:50 PM
> >> To: lng-odp@lists.li
> On 15 May 2017, at 9:42, Bogdan Pricope wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Bogdan Pricope
> ---
> example/generator/odp_generator.c | 102
> platform/linux-generic/odp_packet_io.c | 2 +
> platform/linux-generic/pktio/dpdk.c| 117 +++--
This change is needed to support dpdk crypto pmd's
Signed-off-by: Balakrishna Garapati
---
include/odp/api/spec/crypto.h | 12 +++-
platform/linux-generic/odp_crypto.c| 8 +--
.../validation/api/crypto/odp_crypto_test_inp.c| 76 +-
3
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>
> Add an explicit note telling that soft_exp bits are set only once, for
> the packet actually crossing the boundary. They will not be set for
> further packets.
Isn't this perhaps a bit too restrictive on implementations that
may process packets in parallel and
Hi, Bill
I'll send a patch tomorrow to ignore this one in .checkpatch.conf config.
Best Regards, Yi
On 15 May 2017 at 19:48, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> We don't use Linux kernel macros in ODP. All such warnings should be
> disabled in our version of checkpatch.
>
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 1:59 AM
Bill Fischofer wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Peltonen, Janne (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
> wrote:
> > Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> >> Another generic question regarding ODP. If the package gets passed to
> >> IPsec API, should I trust e.g. IP header values? IOW, can I assume, that
> >> ip-
We don't use Linux kernel macros in ODP. All such warnings should be
disabled in our version of checkpatch.
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Yi He wrote:
> Hi, Maxim
>
> checkpatch.pl reports WARNING on DDF patch series and failed the Pull
> Request, for this WARNING I suggest we remove it from c
Hi, Maxim
checkpatch.pl reports WARNING on DDF patch series and failed the Pull
Request, for this WARNING I suggest we remove it from checkpatch.pl since
it is linux kernel specific?
WARNING: __printf(string-index, first-to-check) is preferred over
__attribute__((format(printf, string-index, firs
18 matches
Mail list logo
