[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <2E01FBB6-030A-40AB-8BEE-F8F271A57568@amacapital.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 16:01:19 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Samuel Neves <sneves@....uc.pt>,
Jean-Philippe Aumasson <jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 02/17] zinc: introduce minimal cryptography library
> On Sep 11, 2018, at 3:18 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 4:16 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>> Jason, can you do one of these conversions as an example?
>
> My preference is really to leave that to a different patch series. But
> if you think I *must*, then I shall.
>
>
I think Ard’s point is valid: in the long run we don’t want two competing software implementations of each primitive. It clearly *should* be possible to make crypto API call into zinc for synchronous software operations, but a demonstration of how this actually works and that there isn’t some change to zinc to make it would well would be in order, I think.
IMO the right approach is do one conversion right away and save the rest for later.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists