On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 07:35:57AM +0100, Stephan Mueller wrote:
>
> >+static struct ahash_alg img_algs[] = {
> >+ {
> >+ .init = img_hash_init,
> >+ .update = img_hash_update,
> >+ .final = img_hash_final,
> >+ .finup = img_hash_finup,
> >+ .digest = img_hash_digest,
> >+ .halg = {
> >+ .digestsize = MD5_DIGEST_SIZE,
> >+ .base = {
> >+ .cra_name = "md5",
> >+ .cra_driver_name = "img-md5",
> >+ .cra_priority = 301,
>
> Just curious: why do you use such odd priorities of 301 or 3000? IMHO,
> all you need is a priority of more than 100 to "beat" the generic C
> prios. Maybe you also need to beat the standard assembler
> implementations which are routinely at 200 for hashes. So, a prio of 300
> should suffice, should it not?
James, can you answer Stephan's question please?
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
