On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 05:01:00AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > On Thursday, March 13, 2014 at 02:56:25 AM, Herbert Xu wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 02:20:29AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > OK, understood. But shall we not preserve the request intact in case a > > > crypto- api function called crypto_ahash_final() with request which has > > > .priv already set? Then we would have really funny corruption of the > > > request going on and I'm not sure that'd be nice. > > > > The priv field is only ever used by ahash.c so how can this happen? > > The crypto API refers to code in the API itself, excluding drivers > > and users. > > OK, I agree with you that people plumbing in the API itself will know what > they're doing. > > btw. can you please check the V3 of 3/3 for the fixup of the base.completion() > call ? I will then do tests and roll V4 of the series. It looks good to me. Thanks, -- 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 linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
