Ok, I'm fine dropping this patch. I'm sure it doesn't affect performance in a measurable way. mh On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 08:21:35 -0500 > Martin Hicks <mort@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> The submission count was off by one. >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Hicks <mort@xxxxxxxx> >> --- > sadly, this directly contradicts: > > commit 4b24ea971a93f5d0bec34bf7bfd0939f70cfaae6 > Author: Vishnu Suresh <Vishnu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon Oct 20 21:06:18 2008 +0800 > > crypto: talitos - Preempt overflow interrupts off-by-one fix > > My guess is your request submission pattern differs from that of > Vishnu's (probably IPSec and/or tcrypt), or later h/w versions have > gotten better about dealing with channel near-overflow conditions. > Either way, I'd prefer we not do this: it might break others, and > I'm guessing doesn't improve performance _that_ much? > > If it does, we could risk it and restrict it to SEC versions 3.3 and > above maybe? Not sure what to do here exactly, barring digging up > and old 2.x SEC and testing. > > Kim > > p.s. I checked, Vishnu isn't with Freescale anymore, so I can't > cc him. -- Martin Hicks P.Eng. | mort@xxxxxxxx Bork Consulting Inc. | +1 (613) 266-2296 -- 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
