Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sun, 18 Sep 2022 11:16:49 +0800
From:   Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc:     linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        phone-devel@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Hansson <newbyte@disroot.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/16] crypto: ux500/hash: Implement .export and
 .import
Message-ID: <YyaNoXLcMAaBrpTY@gondor.apana.org.au>
References: <20220816140049.102306-1-linus.walleij@linaro.org>
 <20220816140049.102306-11-linus.walleij@linaro.org>
 <YwdBIfASgGMDONx4@gondor.apana.org.au>
 <CACRpkdaNBvXvoHHUYfkAGSH1c7w0nER6yOgL9pB7OaXZL6b6_w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdaNBvXvoHHUYfkAGSH1c7w0nER6yOgL9pB7OaXZL6b6_w@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 09:14:55PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> I see the problem.
> 
> Do you think we could merge patches 1 thru 9 for this kernel
> cycle though to lower my patch stack? I can resend just those
> if you like.

I had a look through 1-9 but quite a few seem like they were part
of the import/export rework.  For example, I think patch 8 would
actually break multiple hash attempts in parallel.

Could you plesae go through them and repost the ones that make
sense on their own?

Thanks,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt