Re: [PATCH v4] x86, crypto: ported aes-ni implementation to x86

2010-11-17 Thread Huang Ying
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 15:41 +0800, Mathias Krause wrote: > On 11.11.2010, 23:20 Mathias Krause wrote: > > The AES-NI instructions are also available in legacy mode so the 32-bit > > architecture may profit from those, too. > > > > To illustrate the performance gain here's a short summary of a dm-c

Re: [PATCH v4] x86, crypto: ported aes-ni implementation to x86

2010-11-17 Thread Mathias Krause
On 11.11.2010, 23:20 Mathias Krause wrote: > The AES-NI instructions are also available in legacy mode so the 32-bit > architecture may profit from those, too. > > To illustrate the performance gain here's a short summary of a dm-crypt > speed test on a Core i7 M620 running at 2.67GHz comparing bo

Re: [PATCH v3] x86, crypto: ported aes-ni implementation to x86

2010-11-17 Thread Mathias Krause
On 13.11.2010, 00:25 Mathias Krause wrote: > On 12.11.2010, 08:34 Huang Ying wrote: > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 15:30 +0800, Mathias Krause wrote: >>> On 12.11.2010, 01:33 Huang Ying wrote: Why the improvement of ECB is so small? I can not understand it. It should be as big as CBC. >>> >>> I

Re: [PATCH 2/3] RFC4106 AES-GCM Driver Using Intel New Instructions

2010-11-17 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 14:04:05 -0500 Herbert Xu wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 04:19:09PM +0100, tadeusz.st...@intel.com wrote: > > Hi Herbert, > >We have reworked the assembly to use macros instead of the new aesni > > instructions. > > Both applied. Thanks for your efforts! Whatever's in

Re: Checkpatch complaining about spaces around * used as arithmetic operator

2010-11-17 Thread Andy Whitcroft
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:44:03PM -0700, Allyn, Mark A wrote: > Hello: > > I had checkpatch complain about spaces around the * symbol when it is used as > an arithmetic operator (multiply) and not an address indicator. > > This did not happen before; it's happening in the current next kernel. >

Re: [PATCH v1.3 2/4] key: add tpm_send command

2010-11-17 Thread Rajiv Andrade
On 12/11/10 20:11, David Howells wrote: David Safford wrote: David, does this look ok to you? If so, I will do two patches, one to fix the helper name throughout the existing tpm.c, and then a new version of the tpm_send patch which uses the new name. I prefer my suggestion: Wrapping the modu

Re: [PATCH 1/7] crypto: updates omap sham device related platform code

2010-11-17 Thread Dmitry Kasatkin
Hi, This patch was already applied months ago. It appeared by mistake as "git format-patch" took it somehow. Please ignore it... - Dmitry On 16/11/10 19:19, ext Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Dmitry Kasatkin [101110 09:20]: > >> - registration with multi OMAP kernels support >> - clocks >> >> Sig