[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/12] introduce security offload library

[Akhil Goyal]

Hi Thomas,
On 10/24/2017 3:22 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 24/10/2017 11:41, Akhil Goyal:
>> Hi Thomas,
>> On 10/23/2017 2:29 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> 22/10/2017 22:37, Akhil Goyal:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> On 10/21/2017 9:43 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>> On 10/20/2017 3:02 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>>>>> 16/10/2017 12:44, Thomas Monjalon:
>>>>>>> 15/10/2017 00:17, Akhil Goyal:
>>>>>>>> This patchset introduce the rte_security library in DPDK.
>>>>>>>> This also includes the sample implementation of drivers and
>>>>>>>> changes in ipsec gateway application to demonstrate its usage.
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>> This patchset is also available at:
>>>>>>>> git://dpdk.org/draft/dpdk-draft-ipsec
>>>>>>>> branch: integration_v4
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I understand well, this patchset is the result of the group work?
>>>>>>> Nothing else is needed to merge for the IPsec offload features?
>>>>> Yes this patchset is a result of a group work.
>>>>> We do not need anything else to be merged for ipsec offload features.
>>>>> But Aviad has made some fixes in the ipsec application which may result
>>>>> in conflict with the last patch in this series.
>>>>> So v4 was just rebased over those patches sent by Aviad separately.
>>>>> We would send a v5 incorporating/answering to all the comments/queries
>>>>> rebased over the v2 of the Aviad's fixes to the application.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just for information,
>>>> I have rebased the rte_security patches over crypto-next and over
>>>> Aviad's v2. The patches are available at the draft tree
>>>> "git://dpdk.org/draft/dpdk-draft-ipsec", branch integration_v5.
>>>>
>>>> The patchset include the changes suggested by Thomas and Konstantin on v4.
>>>>
>>>> The patches are not sent to the mailing list as the ipsec-secgw patches
>>>> from Aviad needs a v3 and I would like to send the patch set rebased
>>>> over the v3. I will send the patchset as soon as Aviad's patches are
>>>> ready to be merged(most probably on Monday).
>>>>
>>>> Please let me know in case, there is some risk in getting this series
>>>> applied in RC2.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the info Akhil.
>>> A lot of other things are not yet ready for RC2.
>>> You are still in time.
>>>
>>>
>> On which should I base v5 - master or crypto-next?
> 
> Up to you.
> Just tell me which one you choose please.
>
It is sent over crypto-next which is rebased over latest master as of now.

Thanks,
Akhil