[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023061257-unbeaten-dropkick-a25c@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2023 07:38:27 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Qingsong Chen <changxian.cqs@...group.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
田洪亮 <tate.thl@...group.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Rust scatterlist abstractions
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:49:51AM +0800, Qingsong Chen wrote:
> On 6/10/23 11:35 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 05:33:47PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 06:49:06PM +0800, Qingsong Chen wrote:
> > > > Hi All!
> > > >
> > > > This is a version of scatterlist abstractions for Rust drivers.
> > > >
> > > > Scatterlist is used for efficient management of memory buffers, which is
> > > > essential for many kernel-level operations such as Direct Memory Access
> > > > (DMA) transfers and crypto APIs.
> > > >
> > > > This patch should be a good start to introduce the crypto APIs for Rust
> > > > drivers and to develop cipher algorithms in Rust later.
> > >
> > > I thought we were getting rid of the scatter list api for the crypto
> > > drivers, so this shouldn't be needed going forward, right? Why not just
> > > use the direct apis instead?
> >
> > See https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZH2hgrV6po9dkxi+@gondor.apana.org.au for
> > the details of that (sorry I forgot the link first time...)
>
> Thanks for the information. I agree that turning simple buffers into
> sg-bufs is not a good idea. If I were implementing a new cipher
> algorithm, I would definitely follow the `struct cipher_alg`, which
> takes simple `u8 *` pointer as parameter. However, if we'd like to
> utilize some existing ciphers, such as aead, we still need scatterlists
> to construct an `aead_request` for further operations, util changes are
> made to the underlying interface.
Why not make the changes to the C code first, and get those changes
merged, making this patch series not needed at all?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists