On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 05:30:14PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > However, it's quite a can of worms you're opening here. Speed is > easily quantified, and it may even be feasible to introduce some kind > of boottime benchmark to select the fastest implementation available > (like already exists for xor and raid6, for instance). > @Herbert: was something like this ever proposed? And would you > consider merging it if it were implemented adequately? Up until now static priorities have been sufficient in selecting the best implementation. However, if you can show us a case where a given implementation is slower on one host but faster on another then sure we can add a run-time test and priority adjustment for it. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ecryptfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
