[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110901222814.GB12086@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 15:28:14 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Bob Pearson <rpearson@...temfabricworks.com>,
"'Andreas Dilger'" <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
"'Herbert Xu'" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"'Theodore Tso'" <tytso@....edu>,
"'David Miller'" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"'linux-kernel'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"'Mingming Cao'" <cmm@...ibm.com>,
"'linux-crypto'" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"'linux-fsdevel'" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] crc32c: Implement a self-test for CRC32c
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 06:24:22PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 03:18:54PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > I suspect it would be pretty easy to adapt the Makefile to generate the
> > relevant .c and .h files; in particular it could be useful to use the crypto
> > framework for crc32 on the off chance anyone wants to provide hwaccel for that
> > too.
>
> crc32 or crc32c? Note that there already is a hardware optimized crc32c
> for recent Intel CPUs in arch/x86/crypto/crc32c-intel.c.
crc32, since it currently doesn't use the crypto api at all, and Bob was
interested in implementing slice-by-8 for it. Though I suppose so long as
there aren't any reasons to override the sw crc32 implementation we could just
fall back to Bob's earlier patch to implement slice-by-8 for crc32?
<shrug> I don't mind implementing faster crc32/crc32c.
(As far as crc32c goes, my motivation is to make sw crc32c faster for the cases
where you don't have Intel hw.)
--D
--
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