On 3/8/17 11:35 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 11:28 -0600, Mark Hatle wrote: >> On 3/8/17 10:57 AM, Ross Burton wrote: >>> >>> Cryptodev is a way for userspace to access the kernel crypto >>> drivers (and so, >>> hardware crypto). >> If the BSP does not support crypto dev, what is the harm in this? It >> should fall back to standard behaviors. > > Note that the implication here is that openssl depends on the kernel > building and many other pieces of the system depend on openssl so it > does bottleneck the build somewhat.
I thought the crypto dev interface had been standardized and no longer required a specific kernel-specific instance. If this is not true, then it's effectively machine specific already. > It also means a kernel rebuild ends up triggering half the userspace to > rebuild which is annoying for users. > > >>> Not all hardware supports cryptodev so this is something that >>> should be enabled >>> in a BSP layer instead of in oe-core. >> This would make the package be machine specific, which I'm not sure >> is good for >> a package like openssl. (Distro specific, I'm fine with -- machine >> I've got >> concerns.) > > How commonly are kernel crypto drivers used? We are seeing it used a lot, especially on IA platforms. (I have seen some usage on an arm platform, but don't remember which.) --Mark > Cheers, > > Richard > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
