linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] Crypto: Talitos: Support for Async

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:46:27 +0800
From:	"Li Yang-R58472" <r58472@...escale.com>
To:	"Ira W. Snyder" <iws@...o.caltech.edu>,
	"Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:	"Kumar Gala" <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
	<herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	"Tabi Timur-B04825" <B04825@...escale.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
	"Suresh Vishnu-B05022" <B05022@...escale.com>,
	<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Dudhat Dipen-B09055" <B09055@...escale.com>,
	"Gupta Maneesh-B18878" <B18878@...escale.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] Crypto: Talitos: Support for Async_tx XOR offload


>Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Crypto: Talitos: Support for 
>Async_tx XOR offload
>
>On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 03:47:48PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> Kumar Gala wrote:
>> >>> Changes with respect to v1 as per comments received o. 
>Rebased to 
>> >>> linux-next as of 20091216 o. The selection is based exclusive of 
>> >>> fsldma o. Intoduced a new Kernel Configuration variable
>> >>>   *. This enables selecting the Cryptographic functionality
>> >>>      of Talitos along with fsldma.
>> >>>   *. Disables the XOR parity calculation offload, if 
>fsldma enabled
>> >>>      either as kernel in-built or as a module
>> >>>   *. Once the inter-operability with fsldma is resolved, 
>this option
>> >>>      can be removed
>> >> wait, why can't the interoperability bug be fixed in the 
>first place?
>> > 
>> > I agree w/Kim.  We need to better understand what the bug 
>is and how to reproduce it so we can get to the root cause.
>> > 
>> > Paper taping over it by disabling fsldma is not the right solution.
>> 
>> Hopefully this prompts fsldma authors to get involved because the 
>> interoperability issue has been out there without comment*, just 
>> band-aids, since October.
>> 
>> --
>> Dan
>> 
>> * well one comment from Ira saying the interrupt 
>functionality worked 
>> for him.
>
>Yes, I have used the device_prep_dma_interrupt() functionality 
>quite a while back. However, I found it to be pretty much 
>useless. Any functionality I need is covered by adding a 
>callback to the last DMA
>memcpy() operation. Since the operations happen in-order, I 
>can be sure that the entire set of memcpy()s cas completed. I 
>never needed the capability to generate an interrupt without a 
>memcpy().
>
>I agree that the fsldma driver could use some love. There are 
>places where I am still not confident in the locking. Perhaps 
>I can find some time over Christmas to work on it, but I need 
>someone with 85xx/86xx hardware to test the changes. I only 
>have 83xx hardware.

I can also help with the 85xx testing when I finish the busy project
soon.

- Leo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/