From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B43DC47082 for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 00:27:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE356136D for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 00:27:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232544AbhFIA27 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2021 20:28:59 -0400 Received: from novek.ru ([213.148.174.62]:33944 "EHLO novek.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232384AbhFIA27 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2021 20:28:59 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.18] (unknown [37.228.234.253]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by novek.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D2E550048B; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 03:25:21 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 novek.ru 8D2E550048B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=novek.ru; s=mail; t=1623198323; bh=raYgrC7iYGAAHbmFTCbdldA7R4Nz93S6dtLj7TJHBec=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=xIANxlUUCq2Pt0r4pdzB8bKjNqorDzpSAiGZaG5Jk4uGS5RLQn6N1Ou3BLLbAI3nx N+oJvOrxAz0z9rNSkdg92zUJkY3Zf5Y2MkEi5lNVXCSLnvvc/TKtUgVg5Fw4Ojm/le yzfmVFsta+7DQCjczIe8yaNlrAKZXrS9ze4jDaa4= Subject: Re: quic in-kernel implementation? To: Alexander Aring Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, smfrench@gmail.com, Leif Sahlberg , Steven Whitehouse References: <6b4027c4-7c25-fa98-42bc-f5b3a55e1d5a@novek.ru> From: Vadim Fedorenko Message-ID: <9ce530f5-cfe7-b1d4-ede6-d88801a769ba@novek.ru> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 01:27:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org On 08.06.2021 22:06, Alexander Aring wrote: > Hi Vadim, > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 4:59 PM Vadim Fedorenko wrote: >> >> On 07.06.2021 16:25, Alexander Ahring Oder Aring wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> as I notice there exists several quic user space implementations, is >>> there any interest or process of doing an in-kernel implementation? I >>> am asking because I would like to try out quic with an in-kernel >>> application protocol like DLM. Besides DLM I've heard that the SMB >>> community is also interested into such implementation. >>> >>> - Alex >>> >> >> Hi! >> I'm working on test in-kernel implementation of quic. It's based on the >> kernel-tls work and uses the same ULP approach to setup connection >> configuration. It's mostly about offload crypto operations of short header >> to kernel and use user-space implementation to deal with any other types >> of packets. Hope to test it till the end of June with some help from >> Jakub. > > Thanks, sounds interesting. Does this allow the kernel to create a quic socket? > Not exactly. It's based on top of UDP socket and is configured by setsockopt like it's done for Kernel TLS implementation. The main point of this work is to offload cryptography only without implementing special address family.