From: James Hartley Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] crypto: Add Imagination Technologies hw hash accelerator Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:19:09 +0000 Message-ID: <54C9362D.1050409@imgtec.com> References: <54C826EC.8050103@imgtec.com> <54C82D69.9070200@imgtec.com> <20150128005640.GA12143@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andrew Bresticker , Ezequiel Garcia , To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from mailapp01.imgtec.com ([195.59.15.196]:43399 "EHLO mailapp01.imgtec.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754991AbbA2DE0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:04:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150128005640.GA12143@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/28/15 00:56, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 12:29:29AM +0000, James Hartley wrote: >> - If it is mandatory to impement a fallback driver (because the >> potential users of the framework would not know only digest is >> supported?) > Yes it is mandatory. > >> If I need to implement fallback drivers, would the Niagra2 SPU >> driver be a good reference >> http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/crypto/n2_core.c ? > Yes it's a good example. > > Cheers, Great, I'll prepare a new patchset. For the previous patches I did some basic testing using the built in crypto manager tests, but these all pass without the fallback implemented - is there another more appropriate set of tests that you would recommend I use to verify that my implementation is correct? Thanks, James