[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EEFC7D2.70803@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:25:06 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, trenn@...e.de, kay.sievers@....org,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, kay.sievers@...y.org,
axboe@...nel.dk, herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au, ying.huang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] crypto: Add support for x86 cpuid auto loading
for x86 crypto drivers
On 12/19/2011 03:22 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 02:47:39PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > static int __init padlock_init(void)
> > {
> > int rc = -ENODEV;
> > @@ -533,15 +540,8 @@ static int __init padlock_init(void)
> > struct shash_alg *sha1;
> > struct shash_alg *sha256;
> >
> > - if (!cpu_has_phe) {
> > - printk(KERN_NOTICE PFX "VIA PadLock Hash Engine not detected.\n");
> > - return -ENODEV;
> > - }
> > -
> > - if (!cpu_has_phe_enabled) {
> > - printk(KERN_NOTICE PFX "VIA PadLock detected, but not enabled. Hmm, strange...\n");
> > + if (!x86_match_cpu(padlock_sha_ids) || !cpu_has_phe_enabled)
> > return -ENODEV;
> > - }
>
> don't we want to keep the printk ?
>
> Seems that if it's been disabled by the BIOS for some reason, it will now
> silently fail instead of printing a nice warning.
>
The first printk is insanely annoying, because the end result is that we
get a printk of all the crypto engines that are *not* enabled...
arguably it would be somewhat nice to get a printk when a crypto engine
*is* enabled.
-hpa
--
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