From: Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] ARM: NEON based fast(er) AES in CBC/CTR/XTS modes Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:57:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <1380837566-18242-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <20131004174853.GY24303@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <20131004184625.GS12758@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , Will Deacon , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" , "patches@linaro.org" To: Russell King - ARM Linux Return-path: Received: from mail-qa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:33709 "EHLO mail-qa0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751438Ab3JDS5a (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:57:30 -0400 Received: by mail-qa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id k4so1353436qaq.4 for ; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 11:57:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20131004184625.GS12758@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 4 Oct 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 08:41:35PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On 4 October 2013 20:34, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2013, Will Deacon wrote: > > [...] > > >> > > >> Why do you consider it unsuitable to ship the perl script with the kernel? > > >> Perl 5 is already documented as a build dependency in Documentation/Changes > > > > > > Do you have an example of something that does require perl to build the > > > kernel on ARM? I was under the impression that people try to avoid it > > > as much as possible in general. > > > > > > I'm personally sitting on the fence between effectively adding a new > > > kernel build dependencies or carrying the output of the perl script. > > > But if the kernel build does already require perl in practice then this > > > might tip the balance. > > > > > > > I like Russell's suggestion the most, in fact. In this case, the build > > time requirement for Perl effectively gets suspended until you start > > making modifications to the perl script, and the relation between the > > .S and the .pl files is made explicit by the make rule. > > > > Should I put the cmd_perl rule in scripts/Makefile.build ? Or can I > > just keep it under arch/arm/crypto ? > > Just running through the Makefiles, it seems we have a fair amount > of stuff already using perl in various ways. So I wouldn't worry too > much about where it's placed. It's probably something that should > eventually end up in scripts/ at _some_ point. BTW, Russell's opinion has precedence over what I just said. Nicolas