From: Andy Lutomirski Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 02/17] zinc: introduce minimal cryptography library Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 16:01:19 -0700 Message-ID: <2E01FBB6-030A-40AB-8BEE-F8F271A57568@amacapital.net> References: <20180911010838.8818-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <20180911010838.8818-3-Jason@zx2c4.com> <20180911145624.GA21635@kroah.com> <20180911214737.GA81235@gmail.com> <49BAF465-B3DC-4155-BFF9-DB6C386C1878@amacapital.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Eric Biggers , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ard Biesheuvel , LKML , Netdev , David Miller , Andrew Lutomirski , Samuel Neves , Jean-Philippe Aumasson , Linux Crypto Mailing List To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org > On Sep 11, 2018, at 3:18 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: >=20 >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 4:16 PM Andy Lutomirski wro= te: >> Jason, can you do one of these conversions as an example? >=20 > My preference is really to leave that to a different patch series. But > if you think I *must*, then I shall. >=20 >=20 I think Ard=E2=80=99s point is valid: in the long run we don=E2=80=99t want t= wo competing software implementations of each primitive. It clearly *should*= be possible to make crypto API call into zinc for synchronous software oper= ations, but a demonstration of how this actually works and that there isn=E2= =80=99t some change to zinc to make it would well would be in order, I think= . IMO the right approach is do one conversion right away and save the rest for= later.=