From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: {twofish,aes}-{x86_64,i586} versus C implementations Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:47:14 +0200 Message-ID: <20070820104714.GH16680@bingen.suse.de> References: <200708200234.25620.ak@suse.de> <20070820101618.GE16680@bingen.suse.de> <20070820094508.GE9651@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: Andi Kleen , Herbert Xu , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60736 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751276AbXHTJxT (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Aug 2007 05:53:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070820094508.GE9651@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org > Not modprobe, but the crypto subsystem. If you have the generic C code > and the assembly variant it picks the assembly over C. The selection is But only if they're both loaded. Who loads both? > In that case yes. Would it help to add MODULE_ALIAS("aes") to the > assembly version in order to load it (atleast both)? No, modprobe will only load the first it finds. > >Also if one implementation is always better than the other > >then I see little reason to ever have both. > > If you are sure that nobody needs aes on machnies prio i586 than you > could disable the generic version on i386. Why should the i586 version not run on 486/386? > BUT: you might get into some trouble if you remove it from selections > because some modules select it automaticly, IEEE80211_CRYPT_CCMP for > instance. Ok that is a problem. -Andi