Herbert Xu wrote:
> The important thing for now is not which fallback you pick, but how
> you end up invoking them. I want to see the relationship between
> your driver and the fallback occur strictly at the crypto layer, not
> any lower :)
Attached. In module_init() I call crypto_alloc_tfm() an
Jivin Ronen Shitrit lays it down ...
> Hi
>
> OK, found the problem, see new patch for speed.c.
> The problem was that for EVP we first call to print_messege which set an
> alarm (which should signal to the encryption to stop),
> then we init the session and after it we start encryption.
> Since
Jivin shiva chaitanya lays it down ...
> Hi,
>
> Can anybody tell me if there's an updated ocf patch
> for openswan ?
> The current patch is for openswan v2.3.0 but there
> have been many openswan releases since .. The latest
> is openswan 2.4.2dr5 which is more stable and works on
> FC4
I hav
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 01:35:05PM +0900, MERA Keisuke wrote:
>
> Could you give some informations about these, or can I have some
> materials or pointers (for example, a url of your git tree) ?
> Maybe I can help your developments.
Here is the plan:
: 1) Add support for multiple implementation
Hi,
Can anybody tell me if there's an updated ocf patch
for openswan ?
The current patch is for openswan v2.3.0 but there
have been many openswan releases since .. The latest
is openswan 2.4.2dr5 which is more stable and works
on FC4
- Shiva
__
Hi
OK, found the problem, see new patch for speed.c.
The problem was that for EVP we first call to print_messege which set an
alarm (which should signal to the encryption to stop),
then we init the session and after it we start encryption.
Since the machine I'm using is _very_ "lazy" then the init
Hi
I got your code, I did the patch correctly.
If you look into the code you will see that only if SIGALRM is not
defined then we will get to the do_multi
Where you put it, in my code SIGALRM is defined, so I never get there.
So I move it a little below see ssl.patch attached, I think it should be
