On 03/29/2013 06:41 AM, Joel A Fernandes wrote:
> My questions are: > (1) Why is the cryptodev-linux maintained separately outside of the kernel > tree? Is there a plan to push it to the mainline kernel? Hello, The Linux-kernel maintainer rejected the /dev/crypto solution and has added similar - but incompatible - functionality in the mainline kernel. Check AF_ALG. There is comparison with it in cryptodev-linux pages. > (2) What features will we be missing out on if we don't use the extras/ > openssl patch . I am not very comfortable with (re-)compile openssl as > ocf-linux works without extra patches. cryptodev-linux works with the latest openssl without extra patches. The current openssl patch is for old releases of openssl (and also supports additional algorithms). My intention is to stop distributing it at some point. > (3) Why is the extra patch maintained outside of the OpenSSL community? Is > it supposed to maintained out-of-tree for a particular reason? If you check openssl several parts of this patch have been incorporated. The openssl team is pretty slow in including patches though and I plan to give up maintaining an updated version for them. > (4) Lastly, have you seen performance improvements with using > cryptodev-linux vs OCF-linux? I guess getting rid of a layer would give > you a speedup. The question is why would you even want to use the openbsd framework on linux kernel? The Linux kernel has its own cryptographic API and that's what cryptodev-linux uses. If you want the openbsd drivers and framework it would be better to directly use openbsd. regards, Nikos _______________________________________________ Cryptodev-linux-devel mailing list Cryptodev-linux-devel@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/cryptodev-linux-devel
