From: Sebastian Siewior Subject: Re: small patch queue Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:18:13 +0100 Message-ID: <20080312171813.GA7255@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> References: <1200700935-3844-1-git-send-email-sebastian@breakpoint.cc> <20080311133238.GA19847@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]:47925 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750973AbYCLRSQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:18:16 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080311133238.GA19847@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: * Herbert Xu | 2008-03-11 21:32:38 [+0800]: >> The error recovery could get quite complex here, so maybe a BUG() statement >> isn't that bad at all or? > >OK it seems that the only one that can really fail here is Geode. >At this point I don't think we want to make such an intrusive change >just for the Geode. That's what I though :) >Perhaps a better solution for it would be to convert it to the >async interface and use polling from a kernel thread? How fast >is it anyway? Something like 1.7 MB/sec on dm-crypt if I remember correctly. It was faster than software. I thing there is no need for polling because the geode has an interrupt. >Cheers, Sebastian