* Loc Ho | 2008-01-21 17:29:13 [-0800]:

>If that is the case, then in order to fully support async hashing, I would
>need an async version of HASH interface and an async version of digest. Am I
>correct?
Yes. In case you support hmac+sha1 in HW and you don't do sha1 (as
digest) at all you could skip that part.

>Do you think it will be inconsistent if it is assumed that if the
>functional setkey is not called, then it is digest. If it is called, then it
>is hash.
I would prefer to seperate them. However, this is one of those things
where Herbert has the last word :)

>-Loc

Sebastian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to