[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081215112846.GA31804@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:28:46 +1100
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <linux-crypto@...breakpoint.cc>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH crypto] AES: Add support to Intel AES-NI
instructions
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:07:45AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> You have to it if you want to bypass the crypto layer and call asm
> functions directly and I'm not sure whether bypassing the crypto layer
> is a good thing. Both asm routines (the 32bit and 64bit) assume that
> keylen ist at +0 followed by enc key, dec key. Ach and they don't do the
> ALIGN thing.
>
> Herbert what do you thing?
I think it would be OK if it called the assembly routine directly
and we moved this under asm/x86-64. We should do the latter anyway
regardless of what we decide.
However, I'm skeptical about whether we should use of a fallback at
all rather than making this work in softirq context.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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