[PATCH v2 2/2] Crypto: Talitos: Support for Async_tx XOR offload
r58472 at freescale.com
Sat Dec 19 01:46:27 EST 2009
>Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Crypto: Talitos: Support for
>Async_tx XOR offload
>On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 03:47:48PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> Kumar Gala wrote:
>> >>> Changes with respect to v1 as per comments received o.
>> >>> linux-next as of 20091216 o. The selection is based exclusive of
>> >>> fsldma o. Intoduced a new Kernel Configuration variable
>> >>> *. This enables selecting the Cryptographic functionality
>> >>> of Talitos along with fsldma.
>> >>> *. Disables the XOR parity calculation offload, if
>> >>> either as kernel in-built or as a module
>> >>> *. Once the inter-operability with fsldma is resolved,
>> >>> can be removed
>> >> wait, why can't the interoperability bug be fixed in the
>> > I agree w/Kim. We need to better understand what the bug
>is and how to reproduce it so we can get to the root cause.
>> > Paper taping over it by disabling fsldma is not the right solution.
>> Hopefully this prompts fsldma authors to get involved because the
>> interoperability issue has been out there without comment*, just
>> band-aids, since October.
>> * well one comment from Ira saying the interrupt
>> for him.
>Yes, I have used the device_prep_dma_interrupt() functionality
>quite a while back. However, I found it to be pretty much
>useless. Any functionality I need is covered by adding a
>callback to the last DMA
>memcpy() operation. Since the operations happen in-order, I
>can be sure that the entire set of memcpy()s cas completed. I
>never needed the capability to generate an interrupt without a
>I agree that the fsldma driver could use some love. There are
>places where I am still not confident in the locking. Perhaps
>I can find some time over Christmas to work on it, but I need
>someone with 85xx/86xx hardware to test the changes. I only
>have 83xx hardware.
I can also help with the 85xx testing when I finish the busy project
More information about the Linuxppc-dev