Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make cryptoapi non-optional?

[Matt Mackall]

On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 09:35:24AM +1000, James Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> 
> > > d) not disable preemption for long stretches while hashing (a
> > >    limitation of cryptoapi)
> > 
> > Sounds like a bug in CryptoAPI that should be fixed in CryptoAPI.
> 
> This is for the case of hashing from a per cpu context, which is an
> inherently unsafe context for introducing schedule points.  This is not
> a crypto API specific problem.

Yes, but it's introduced by the requirements imposed by cryptoapi. The
current code uses the stack (though currently rather a lot of it),
which lets it be fully re-entrant. Not an option with cryptoapi.

-- 
Matt Mackall : http://www.selenic.com : of or relating to the moon
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/