[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1217857537.29139.70.camel@think.oraclecorp.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 09:45:37 -0400
From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Austin Zhang <austin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Using Intel CRC32 instruction to accelerate CRC32c
algorithm by new crypto API.
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 11:45 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 06:35 -0400, Austin Zhang wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 11:12 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > You could perhaps just use 'unsigned long' here, to avoid the ifdef.
> > Thanks.
> > > And it would be nice if we could make libcrc32c use this too, rather
> > > than just the 'crypto' users.
> > From previous discussing, herbert would like to transfer the libcrc32c
> > interface by new crypto because there were few user using the current
> > libcrc32c interface.
>
> Are we deprecating libcrc32c, then? Or just turning it into a wrapper
> around the crypto code?
>
Long term I'd like to switch btrfs to the crypto api, but right now I'm
using libcrc32c.
>>From a performance point of view I'm probably reading the crypto API
code wrong, but it looks like my choices are to either have a long
standing context and use locking around the digest/hash calls to protect
internal crypto state, or create a new context every time and take a
perf hit while crypto looks up the right module.
Either way it looks slower than just calling good old libcrc32c.
-chris
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists