From: Andy Lutomirski Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4.10 1/6] crypto/sha256: Refactor the API so it can be used without shash Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 11:00:17 -0800 Message-ID: References: <942b91f25a63b22ec4946378a1fffe78d655cf18.1482545792.git.luto@kernel.org> <20161226075757.GA8916@gondor.apana.org.au> <20161227095853.GA10588@gondor.apana.org.au> <586277AE.80401@iogearbox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Herbert Xu , Ard Biesheuvel , Andy Lutomirski , Netdev , LKML , Linux Crypto Mailing List , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Hannes Frederic Sowa , Alexei Starovoitov , Eric Dumazet , Eric Biggers , Tom Herbert , "David S. Miller" To: Daniel Borkmann Return-path: In-Reply-To: <586277AE.80401@iogearbox.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 6:16 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 12/27/2016 10:58 AM, Herbert Xu wrote: >> >> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 10:08:48AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> >>> >>> According to Daniel, the networking folks want to let embedded systems >>> include BPF without requiring the crypto core. >> >> >> Last I checked the IPv4 stack depended on the crypto API so this >> sounds bogus. > > > I think there's a bit of a mixup here with what I said. To clarify, > requirement back then from tracing folks was that bpf engine and > therefore bpf syscall can be build w/o networking enabled for small > devices, so dependencies preferably need to be kept on a absolute > minimum, same counts for either making it suddenly a depend on > CRYPTO or a select CRYPTO for just those few lines that can be > pulled in from lib/ code instead. Somehow I had that in my head as "networking" not "tracing", probably because of the TCA stuff. Whoops. Anyway, I'm rewriting the crypto part of the patch completely based on Ard's feedback.