On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 12:15 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:49:32 -0700 > > > Still, why would some kernel module specifically not want to > > use the fastest HW implementation, and explicitly ask for > > a slower driver? > > Temporary workaround if a bug is found. > > There is really no reason to prevent the user from having this > flexibility, and in return anyone can test any implementation > their cpu can support. Mmmm..., this is a restructuring of the algorithms within the glue code into multiple drivers instead of one and exposing them all. It is a bit orthogonal to the intention of this patch set. I think it is better that I create a separate patch on the glue code on top of this patch set to implement this. Herbert, do you agree with this approach? Tim -- 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
