From: Sebastian Siewior Subject: Re: [PATCH] [crypto] load the SHA1[1|256] module by an alias Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 23:54:08 +0200 Message-ID: <20071006215408.GA3645@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> References: <20070820101618.GE16680@bingen.suse.de> <20070820120605.GA13163@gondor.apana.org.au> <20070930124239.GB24811@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> <20071003073522.GA7285@gondor.apana.org.au> <20071004083512.GA11305@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> <20071005085744.GC10959@gondor.apana.org.au> <20071005135056.GA19693@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> <20071005142022.GA13265@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc ([85.10.199.196]:38207 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765646AbXJFVyP (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Oct 2007 17:54:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071005142022.GA13265@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org * Herbert Xu | 2007-10-05 22:20:22 [+0800]: >On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 03:50:56PM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote: >> >> I did not find a module_mutex. We hold a readlock of crypto_alg_sem >> within the crypto subsystem and request_module() increments >> kmod_concurrent (which may not exceed a certain limit). > >However, it's still good to remove this code since doing a nested >modprobe of "sha" within a modprobe of "sha" just feels wrong. Yes it feels wrong. It even may show that the fallback is not available if padlock is loaded before the generic ones. Sebastian