On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 16:37, Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 02:33:07PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > What is the point of this series? If we are trying to deduplicate > > crypto code by moving it into a dedicated driver, can we please just > > do that unconditionally, instead of doubling the size of the > > validation matrix again? Or are there reasons why one might avoid this > > crypto driver approach? > > Unfortunately it is not a clear size win everywhere. > > PEI jumps up in size even though I'm using the min_pei config for > CryptoPei, seems it *still* has way too much bits compiled in > (didn't look into tweaking the config yet, hints are welcome). > > - 17530 TcgPei > + 17146 TcgPei > + 34362 Tcg2Pei > - 51066 Tcg2Pei > + 333950 CryptoPei >
Why would we use this for PEI if the size increases? > SMM doesn't change much (slight increase): > > + 106662 VariableSmm > - 540818 VariableSmm > + 479374 CryptoSmm > > DXE is a clear win, three users go from > 400k to < 100k which easily > compensates for the almost 700k crypto driver: > > + 17326 TlsDxe > - 19494 TcgDxe > + 19450 TcgDxe > + 36682 SecurityStubDxe > + 54630 Tcg2Dxe > - 68498 Tcg2Dxe > + 78898 SecureBootConfigDxe > + 121190 IScsiDxe > - 125174 IScsiDxe > - 404574 SecureBootConfigDxe > - 479414 SecurityStubDxe > - 667006 TlsDxe > + 696298 CryptoDxe > > Overall it should still be a (small) win even without looking at why PEI > is so big. > > If there are no objections I happily drop the USE_CRYPTO_DRIVER option > and switch over to the crypto driver unconditionally. > Yeah, I'd prefer that. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#99607): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/99607 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/96722233/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
