[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201307201456.JIC35412.VFOMFJOQLOtHFS@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:56:06 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com
Cc: hpa@...or.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.11-rc1] crypto: Fix boot failure due to moduledependency.
Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 06:31:04PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> >
> > However, when I have the library and generic algorithm compiled in,
> > I do not see the PCLMULQDQ version loaded.
> >
> > CONFIG_CRYPTO_CRCT10DIF=y
> > CONFIG_CRYPTO_CRCT10DIF_PCLMUL=m
> > CONFIG_CRC_T10DIF=y
>
> That is completely expected. I don't really think we need to
> do anything about this case. After all, if the admin wants to
> use the optimised version for CRC_T10DIF then they could simply
> compile that in as well.
>
Wow! ;-)
But I'd expect something like
static int __init crc_t10dif_mod_init(void)
{
+#if !defined(CONFIG_CRC_T10DIF_MODULE) && defined(CONFIG_CRYPTO_CRCT10DIF_PCLMUL_MODULE)
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "Consider CONFIG_CRYPTO_CRCT10DIF_PCLMUL=y for better performance\n");
+#endif
crct10dif_tfm = crypto_alloc_shash("crct10dif", 0, 0);
return PTR_RET(crct10dif_tfm);
}
because the admin might not be aware of this implication.
--
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