On 29/01/16 07:54, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>> Hi!
>>
>> CC'ing Rusty and mailing lists
>
> Thanks.
>
>> Rusty and ohers: it looks like both CONFIG_CRC32 and
>> CONFIG_CRYPTO_CRC32 can be compiled as module, and they generate
>> modules with the same name, crc32. Could th
Lucas De Marchi writes:
> Hi!
>
> CC'ing Rusty and mailing lists
Thanks.
> Rusty and ohers: it looks like both CONFIG_CRC32 and
> CONFIG_CRYPTO_CRC32 can be compiled as module, and they generate
> modules with the same name, crc32. Could that be fixed?
Gah. Looks like it's been that way since
Hi!
CC'ing Rusty and mailing lists
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Samson Yeung wrote:
>
> On 01/28/2016 11:21 AM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>>
>> Hi Samson,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Samson Yeung
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Please reply directly as I am not on this list.
>>>
>
On 01/28/2016 09:09 AM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 28. Januar 2016, 08:00:25 schrieb Tadeusz Struk:
>
> Hi Tadeusz,
>
>> Hi Stephan,
>>
>> On 01/27/2016 10:26 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
+ for (i = 0; i < areq->tsgls; i++)
> + put_page(sg_page(sg + i));
>>>
>>>
Am Donnerstag, 28. Januar 2016, 08:00:25 schrieb Tadeusz Struk:
Hi Tadeusz,
>Hi Stephan,
>
>On 01/27/2016 10:26 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
>>> + for (i = 0; i < areq->tsgls; i++)
>>>
>>> > + put_page(sg_page(sg + i));
>>
>> Shouldn't here be the same logic as in put_sgl? I.e.
>>
>>
你的老朋友邀你来Q群:343257759
Hi!
On Do, 2016-01-28 at 10:41 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 11:04 +0100, Steffen Trumtrar wrote:
> > Can I somehow use the keyring framework as an abstraction around my
> > blobbing/deblobbing functionality?
> > So that the "keyring" calls into the crypto driver to decrypt the
Hi Stephan,
On 01/27/2016 10:26 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
>> +for (i = 0; i < areq->tsgls; i++)
>> > + put_page(sg_page(sg + i));
> Shouldn't here be the same logic as in put_sgl? I.e.
>
> for (i = 0; i < sgl->cur; i++) {
> if (!sg_page(sg + i))
>
On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 11:04 +0100, Steffen Trumtrar wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Mimi Zohar writes:
>
> > On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 16:18 +0100, Steffen Trumtrar wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> The RFC Patch attached after this cover letter is mostly for illustration
> >> purposes, so please don't waste too much time
Before the skcipher conversion the async callback used the
crypto_async_request directly as the ablkcipher_request.
It wasn't quite correct, but it worked fine since the
crypto_async_request *base was the first member of the ablkcipher_request
struct. After the skcipher conversion it is not the cas
Hi Herbert,
While testing the algif_aead async patch, I have rerun the async
algif_skcipher tests and I have found some problems.
There are three different issues around algif_skcipher and skcipher.
Two are skcipher conversion related, and one is a bug in the
algif_skcipher, not related to the conv
A user of the skcipher api may have some private context associated with
a request, like for instance the algif_skcipher does, so the api needs to
return the original skcipher_request in the callback instead of the
ablkcipher_request subtype.
Cc: # 4.4.x-
Signed-off-by: Tadeusz Struk
---
crypto
ied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to
> > help improving the system]
> >
> > url:
> > https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Tadeusz-Struk/crypto-af_alg-add-async-support-to-algif_aead/20160128-061818
> > base:
> > https://git.kern
13 matches
Mail list logo
