On 01/17/2011 11:47 AM, Phil Sutter wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 01:48:47PM +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: >> On 01/03/2011 04:01 PM, Phil Sutter wrote: >>> Hey Nikos, >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 02:26:50PM +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: >>>> I've applied patches 1-3, but I haven't applied this one. That is >>>> because this will make the driver not compatible with the original >>>> openbsd interface (we'll have structures with different content). I'd >>>> suggest extensions like those to be added as a new ioctl that can be >>>> checked for existence using an ifdef. >>> >>> Just noticed: I've already done that in the past, when exporting the >>> alignment constraints to userspace - see commit with hash 19033b1. And >>> since now there is a dedicated ioctl for information retrieval, I could >>> restore struct session_op's original content. What do you think? >> >> Do you mean reverting the 19033b1 commit? > > Well, not completely. But I'd move the alignmask field into > session_info_op, which should restore struct session_op's original form. > > Internally I would leave the alignmask field in struct csession, so > alignment-checks will still be done.
That would be best... thanks, Nikos _______________________________________________ Cryptodev-linux-devel mailing list Cryptodev-linux-devel@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/cryptodev-linux-devel
