From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next 1/1] xfrm: don't check offload_handle for
 nonzero
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 17:49:41 +0200
Message-ID: <20180627154941.xtqir64664qrssv5@gauss3.secunet.de>
References: <1530047950-3967-1-git-send-email-shannon.nelson@oracle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
To: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@oracle.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([62.96.220.36]:54598 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S934396AbeF0Ptn (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:49:43 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1530047950-3967-1-git-send-email-shannon.nelson@oracle.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 02:19:10PM -0700, Shannon Nelson wrote:
> The offload_handle should be an opaque data cookie for the driver
> to use, much like the data cookie for a timer or alarm callback.
> Thus, the XFRM stack should not be checking for non-zero, because
> the driver might use that to store an array reference, which could
> be zero, or some other zero but meaningful value.
> 
> We can remove the checks for non-zero because there are plenty
> other attributes also being checked to see if there is an offload
> in place for the SA in question.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@oracle.com>

I don't have access to my hw offload testlab currently,
so I've queued this one until I'm back from my vacation.