Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v3 0/6] Extend XFRM core to allow full offload configuration

From: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 11:56:27 -0700

On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 14:36:52 -0300 Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> I was meaning rather generically handling the packets in the
> hypervisor side without involving the CPU. 
> 
> We have customers deploying many different models for this in their
> hypervisor, including a significant deployment using a model like the
> above. 
> 
> It achieves a kind of connectivity to a VM with 0 hypervisor CPU
> involvement with the vlan push/pop done in HW.

I don't see how that necessitates the full IPsec offload.

Sorry, perhaps I assumed we were on the same page too hastily.

I was referring to a model where the TC rules redirect to a IPsec
tunnel which is then routed to the uplink. All offloaded. Like
we do today for VxLAN encap/decap.

That necessitates full offload, and therefore can be used as a strong
argument for having a full offload in netdev.

> We other use-models, like the offloaded OVS switching model you are
> alluding to, that is Leon has as a followup.