>
>
> On 12/14/2016 12:50 PM, Gonglei wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c
> b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..c0854a1
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,474 @@
> [..]
> > +
> > +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq)
> > +{
> > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv;
> > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req;
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + unsigned int len;
> > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req;
> > + int error;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags);
>
> Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock
> like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking on the whole
> device? OK, it seems you use only one dataqueue, so it
> may not be that relevant.
>
Currently yes, both the backend device (cryptodev-backend-builtin)
and the frontend driver use one dataqueue.
Regards,
-Gonglei
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
