From: Vakul Garg Subject: RE: [PATCH] crypto: caam - Fix key inlining in AEAD shared descriptors Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 03:39:09 +0000 Message-ID: <70e10fa687e249f08a102f148edd3231@BL2PR03MB162.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> References: <1398612374-1746-1-git-send-email-vakul@freescale.com> <20140502191008.db1408c0735f14ed1a0bdb8b@freescale.com> <72e203ad27a64b66b1b876e7b9978e5c@BL2PR03MB162.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <20140505133725.33abd0d08a1662a147c498f5@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: Kim Phillips , "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" , "herbert@gondor.apana.org.au" , "Horia.Geanta@freescale.com" , Ruchika Gupta , "alexandru.porosanu@freescale.com" To: Kim Phillips Return-path: Received: from mail-bn1lp0144.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.163.144]:17982 "EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933740AbaEFDjM convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2014 23:39:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140505133725.33abd0d08a1662a147c498f5@freescale.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Kim > -----Original Message----- > From: Kim Phillips [mailto:kim.phillips@freescale.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 12:07 AM > To: Garg Vakul-B16394 > Cc: Phillips Kim-R1AAHA; linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org; > herbert@gondor.apana.org.au; Geanta Neag Horia Ioan-B05471; Gupta > Ruchika-R66431; Porosanu Alexandru-B06830 > Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: caam - Fix key inlining in AEAD shared > descriptors > > On Sat, 3 May 2014 06:44:39 -0500 > Garg Vakul-B16394 wrote: > > > > From: Kim Phillips [mailto:kim.phillips@freescale.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 5:40 AM > > > > > > On Sun, 27 Apr 2014 11:26:14 -0400 > > > Vakul Garg wrote: > > > > > > > @@ -220,6 +220,8 @@ static int aead_null_set_sh_desc(struct > > > > crypto_aead > > > *aead) > > > > if (DESC_AEAD_NULL_ENC_LEN + DESC_JOB_IO_LEN + > > > > ctx->split_key_pad_len <= CAAM_DESC_BYTES_MAX) > > > > keys_fit_inline = true; > > > > + else > > > > + keys_fit_inline = false; > > > > > > Can we do the easier to read: > > > > > > keys_fit_inline = false; > > > if (DESC_AEAD_NULL_ENC_LEN + DESC_JOB_IO_LEN + > > > ctx->split_key_pad_len <= CAAM_DESC_BYTES_MAX) > > > keys_fit_inline = true; > > > > > > ? > > > > Why pre-init a variable with default value when it could be > overwritten? > > why not? compiler output doesn't differ in this regard. > Agree that compiler output doesn't differ. But why depend upon compiler's optimization capability while writing code when we can be explicit? > > I think that the form I submitted is equally easy to read. > > adding one line instead of two -> less lines overall -> more code on one > screen -> easier to read. > I think that this is a matter of personal coding choice. Both the approaches are fine and compliant to kernel coding guidelines. > Kim