On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:33PM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
>
> If this is that important, isn't it better to add/ replace the current
> _aligned call with such an optimized one? Or applies this kind of
> optimization only to this special driver where it is very expensive
> otherwise?
In t
* Herbert Xu | 2007-08-02 17:28:25 [+0800]:
>On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:23:51AM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
>>
>> The only difference I can see is, that crypto_tfm_alg_alignmask() is
>> replaced with a static defined number instead of a lookup in a struct.
>> IS this the optimization?
>
>Yes,
* Sebastian Siewior | 2007-08-02 14:57:43 [+0200]:
>setkey_unaligned() commited in ca7c39385ce1a7b44894a4b225a4608624e90730
>overwrites unallocated memory in the following memset() because I used the
>wrong buffer length.
Herbert, I am really sorry for introducing new bugs.
Sebastian
-
To unsubs
setkey_unaligned() commited in ca7c39385ce1a7b44894a4b225a4608624e90730
overwrites unallocated memory in the following memset() because I used the
wrong buffer length.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Siewior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- a/crypto/ablkcipher.c
+++ b/crypto/ablkcipher.c
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 09:47:58AM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
> This is function does the same thing for ablkcipher that is done for
> blkcipher by crypto_blkcipher_ctx_aligned(): it returns an aligned
> address of the private ctx.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Siewior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pat
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:23:51AM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
>
> The only difference I can see is, that crypto_tfm_alg_alignmask() is
> replaced with a static defined number instead of a lookup in a struct.
> IS this the optimization?
Yes, the fact that the alignment mask is a constant allo
* Herbert Xu | 2007-08-02 16:58:16 [+0800]:
>On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 10:10:09AM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
>> It seems that the driver uses something like crypto_.*_ctx_aligned() of his
>> own.
>> Replace it with the API's functions. Compile tested.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Siewior <[
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 10:10:09AM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
> It seems that the driver uses something like crypto_.*_ctx_aligned() of his
> own.
> Replace it with the API's functions. Compile tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Siewior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Actually this is intentional as
It seems that the driver uses something like crypto_.*_ctx_aligned() of his own.
Replace it with the API's functions. Compile tested.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Siewior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- a/drivers/crypto/padlock-aes.c
+++ b/drivers/crypto/padlock-aes.c
@@ -297,30 +297,10 @@ aes_hw_extkey_avai
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 09:41:22AM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
>
> Okey this makes sense. What about crypto_ctxsize()? Isn't a bug there?
> I can't specify an alignmask of 16 (what I assumed yesterday after a
> part of brain switched to sleep()) because this brakes the ALIGN()
> macro. Isn't s
This is function does the same thing for ablkcipher that is done for
blkcipher by crypto_blkcipher_ctx_aligned(): it returns an aligned
address of the private ctx.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Siewior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- a/include/crypto/algapi.h
+++ b/include/crypto/algapi.h
@@ -160,6 +160,11 @@
* Herbert Xu | 2007-08-02 10:30:06 [+0800]:
>> I noticed this, after my code did not work properly. The reason was,
>> that my private ctx was not retrieved with
>> crypto_ablkcipher_ctx_aligned() (attached) but with
>> crypto_ablkcipher_ctx() (and it was not properly aligned anymore).
>> My fault
12 matches
Mail list logo
