[dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/3] set protocol specific metadata using set_pkt_metadata API

[Nicolau, Radu]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anoob Joseph [mailto:anoob.joseph at caviumnetworks.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 2:38 PM
> To: Nicolau, Radu <radu.nicolau at intel.com>; Akhil Goyal
> <akhil.goyal at nxp.com>
> Cc: anoob.joseph at caviumnetworks.com; Doherty, Declan
> <declan.doherty at intel.com>; Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio
> <sergio.gonzalez.monroy at intel.com>; Jerin Jacob
> <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>; Narayana Prasad
> <narayanaprasad.athreya at caviumnetworks.com>; Nelio Laranjeiro
> <nelio.laranjeiro at 6wind.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] set protocol specific metadata using set_pkt_metadata
> API
> 
> Hi Radu,
> 
> On 01/26/2018 04:52 PM, Nicolau, Radu wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Anoob Joseph [mailto:anoob.joseph at caviumnetworks.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 5:13 PM
> >> To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal at nxp.com>; Nicolau, Radu
> >> <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
> >> Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty at intel.com>; Gonzalez Monroy,
> >> Sergio <sergio.gonzalez.monroy at intel.com>;
> >> anoob.joseph at caviumnetworks.com; Jerin Jacob
> >> <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>; Narayana Prasad
> >> <narayanaprasad.athreya at caviumnetworks.com>; Nelio Laranjeiro
> >> <nelio.laranjeiro at 6wind.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> >> Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] set protocol specific metadata using
> >> set_pkt_metadata API
> >>
> >> Hi Akhil, Radu,
> >>
> >> Could you review the patch and share your thoughts on the proposed
> >> change?
> >>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've had a quick look. From what I can see you can do everything you do in
> this patch with the current API. For example you can store an internal struct
> pointer in the private section of the security context and you can increment
> the ESP SN with every tx or set metadata call.
> With the current API, PMD could store the ESN with the security session, but
> there is no means for the application to read this. Application should be
> aware of the sequence number used per packet. This is required to monitor
> sequence number overflow.In the proposal, the sequence number field is
> IN-OUT. So application could either dictate the sequence number, or read
> the value from the PMD.
> 
> Thanks,
> Anoob

My concern is that we are adding too much and too specific to the security API.
Overflow situation can be monitored with a tx callback event or a crypto callback event, depending on the device type.