Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:43:10 +0300 | From | Jari Ruusu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cryptoloop |
| |
Chris Friesen wrote: > Jari Ruusu wrote: > > Because loop-AES attempts to be compatible with structures in loop.h by not > > modifying loop.h at all. This is what the "no kernel sources patched or > > replaced" means. Breakage in loop.h breaks loop-AES, and I have to clean the > > mess. > > We're in a development stream. It is kind of expected that in-kernel > APIs may change if the developers feel it will lead to some improvement. > > This sucks for people that are trying to track those APIs with > out-of-kernel patches, but its a fact of life.
I know. I already have to deal with API breakages.
Changing transfer function prototype may be a tiny speed improvement for one implementation that happens to use unoptimal API, but at same time be tiny speed degration to other implementations that use more saner APIs. I am unhappy with that change, because I happen to maintain four such transfers that would be subject to tiny speed degration.
Regards, Jari Ruusu <jari.ruusu@pp.inet.fi>
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |