* rsnel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 2007-09-06 16:57:26 [+0200]: >> The compiler should generate similar code. > >I'd rather tell the compiler what I want than to introduce a new local >variable and a conditional branch in the hope that the compiler will >optimize it away, just to avoid a goto. > >If you insist on getting rid of the goto, I could unroll the first >iteration of the loop by hand. (when is submitted lrw.c it had the first >iteration unrolled; Herbert replaced it with this goto) I didn't know that Herbert did it the same way. In that case you are fine :) >Christoph encountered a deadlock after a few hours and 16GB of data (on >an aes-xts-plain partition). Assuming there is an error in xts.c, is >there an obvious way of finding it? Haven't seen any locks in your code, so your part may be fine. How do I use this? cryptsetup -c aes-xts or? >Greetings, > >Rik. Sebastian - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
