On 27 March 2014 12:46, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 27 March 2014 12:36, Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:29:00PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> The GHASH setkey() function uses SSE registers but fails to call
>>> kernel_fpu_begin()/kernel_fpu_end(). Instead of adding these calls, and
>>> then having to deal with the restriction that they cannot be called from
>>> interrupt context, move the setkey() implementation to the C domain.
>>
>> Note that setkey cannot be called from interrupt context since
>> allocation/setkey is supposed to be slow-path material.
>>
>> But your approach is fine by me.
>>
>
> I agree that it makes little sense to call this from atomic context,
> but that still means (I think, but the x86 guys should confirm) that
> you are supposed to call kernel_fpu_begin() and kernel_fpu_end().
>
>>> Note that setkey() does not use any particular SSE features and is not
>>> expected to become a performance bottleneck.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> I suppose this should be marked for stable as well?
>>
>> Sure I'll add the cc.
>>
>
> Perhaps wait for an ack from team x86?
>

... oh, and I noticed that I forgot to remove the forward declaration
of clmul_ghash_setkey() as well.

Sorry.

-- 
Ard.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to