Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:34:59 +0200 | From | Andreas Steinmetz <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/4] AES assembler implementation for x86_64 |
| |
Denis Vlasenko wrote: > On Monday 18 April 2005 12:01, Andreas Steinmetz wrote: > >>Denis Vlasenko wrote: >> >>>On Sunday 17 April 2005 22:20, Andreas Steinmetz wrote: >>> >>> >>>>The attached patch contains Gladman's in-kernel code for key schedule >>>>and table generation modified to fit to my assembler implementation, >>>>-- >>>>Andreas Steinmetz SPAMmers use robotrap@domdv.de >>> >>> >>>Patch contains a mix of several coding styles: >>> >>>+/* >>>+ * #define byte(x, nr) ((unsigned char)((x) >> (nr*8))) >>>+ */ >>>+inline static u8 >>>+byte(const u32 x, const unsigned n) >>>+{ >>>+ return x >> (n << 3); >>>+} >>> >>>what does const do here? >> >>Taken 'as is' from current kernel sources, i,e, crypto/aes.c > > > "It's a cut-n-paste" is not a good argument here. You > are adding a _new file_ with your patch, it's okay to clean > it up while doing this. IOW: do not dup the mess. > > OTOH, if _exactly the same file_ exist in i384 arch, then > you should not duplicate it at all. Find a way to use one file > for both arches. > > Note that this is only my view, I can be wrong. > -- > vda >
I'll wait for Herbert Xu's review and his opinion on this. -- Andreas Steinmetz SPAMmers use robotrap@domdv.de - 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/
| |