From: "Fernandes, Joel A" Subject: RE: [PATCH] OMAP: AES: Don't idle/start AES device between Encrypt operations Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 02:49:50 +0000 Message-ID: <083BC63EECB6FD41B8E81CF7FD87CC0F2E4D6FF3@DLEE08.ent.ti.com> References: <1368293024-6654-1-git-send-email-joelagnel@ti.com> <878v3i6dne.fsf@linaro.org> <083BC63EECB6FD41B8E81CF7FD87CC0F2E4D6E5F@DLEE08.ent.ti.com> <87y5bi38yc.fsf@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "Mark A. Greer" To: Kevin Hilman Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87y5bi38yc.fsf@linaro.org> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org Hi Kevin, > have to be created anyway. > > Imagine encrypting a 20M block- this means runtime PM API is called > > 20 * 1024 / 4 =~ 5000 times. The slow down in my opinion doesn't make it > worth it. > > What is your opinion about this? > > OK, I'm not terribly familiar with the crypto API, so I was assuming that the > init/exit calls you're instrumenting were happening at driver probe/remove > time. Based on your clarifications, that doesn't seem to be the case. > > My main concern is that drivers don't simply use 'get' on driver probe and 'put' > on driver remove and force the system awake as long as the driver is present. > I've seen that plenty of times, and I was assuming that's what was going on > here. Sorry for the confusion. [Joel] No problem, thanks. Yes, the driver doesn't put/get in the probe functions. Just when it has to do its work. > How about just add a few more details to the changelog summarizing > how/when the init/exit calls happen to make it a bit more clear. [Joel] Sure, I will make this more clear. Sorry for not doing so earlier. Thanks, Joel