From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [CRYPTO] tcrypt: Move sg_init_table out of timing loops Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 06:50:58 +0100 Message-ID: <20071030055056.GG7499@kernel.dk> References: <20071026145905.GA13850@gondor.apana.org.au> <20071029201627.GD7499@kernel.dk> <20071030000827.GA9037@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "David S. Miller" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Crypto Mailing List , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([87.55.233.238]:27368 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752727AbXJ3FvA (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 01:51:00 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071030000827.GA9037@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 30 2007, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 09:16:27PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 26 2007, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > [CRYPTO] tcrypt: Move sg_init_table out of timing loops > > > > > > This patch moves the sg_init_table out of the timing loops for hash > > > algorithms so that it doesn't impact on the speed test results. > > > > Wouldn't it be better to just make sg_init_one() call sg_init_table? > > This looks fine to me although I think it's orthogonal to the > patch you were quoting :) How so? The reason you changed it to sg_init_table() + sg_set_buf() is exactly because sg_init_one() didn't properly init the entry (as they name promised). -- Jens Axboe