[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZBKVHvlNEKG4t8Pv@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 12:03:42 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
"ye.xingchen@....com.cn" <ye.xingchen@....com.cn>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dtsen@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: p10-aes-gcm - remove duplicate include header
On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 02:58:04PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> Although one question I do have for you is what rules, if any, do we
> have for deciding whether crypto code goes in drivers/crypto vs
> arch/*/crypto?
If it's on the CPU then it should probably live under arch. Yes
there have been exceptions in the past, with VIA PadLock on x86
and vmx on PPC being prime examples.
> I wonder if we should move drivers/crypto/vmx into arch/powerpc/crypto,
> so that all the powerpc CRYPTOGAMS code is in one place. That would help
> to clean up some of the duplication of perl scripts we now have.
Yes I think that would certainly make sense.
Thanks,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists