From: Herbert Xu
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 16:20:34 +1000
> I think this patch belongs to the networking tree. The reason is
> that it's related to xfrm offload which has nothing to do with the
> Crypto API.
>
> Do xfrm offload drivers usually go through the networking tree or
> would it be better
Hi Herbert, David
On 7/27/2020 3:29 PM, Ayush Sawal wrote:
On 7/27/2020 2:46 PM, Steffen Klassert wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 04:20:34PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 05:01:08PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
Please start submitting chcr patches to the crypto subsystem, whe
On 7/27/2020 2:46 PM, Steffen Klassert wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 04:20:34PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 05:01:08PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
Please start submitting chcr patches to the crypto subsystem, where it
belongs, instead of the networking GIT trees.
Hi Dave
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 04:20:34PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 05:01:08PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >
> > Please start submitting chcr patches to the crypto subsystem, where it
> > belongs, instead of the networking GIT trees.
>
> Hi Dave:
>
> I think this patch belongs
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 05:01:08PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>
> Please start submitting chcr patches to the crypto subsystem, where it
> belongs, instead of the networking GIT trees.
Hi Dave:
I think this patch belongs to the networking tree. The reason is
that it's related to xfrm offload wh
Please start submitting chcr patches to the crypto subsystem, where it
belongs, instead of the networking GIT trees.
This has been going on for far too long.
Thank you.
As chcr was removed without clearing xfrmdev_ops and netdev
feature(esp-hw-offload). When a recalculation of netdev feature is
triggered by changing tls feature(tls-hw-tx-offload) from user request,
it causes a page fault due to absence of valid xfrmdev_ops.
So fixing this by registering chcr_xfrm
