lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [CRYPTO] is it really optimized ?
Hi,

On 4/14/07, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> It should be easy to restrict a crypto device so that it's used
> by one specific user. That's why we have generic names ("aes") vs.
> specific ones ("aes-foo").
>
> So if you let the priority user pick "aes-foo" instead of "aes",
> and given that there is a higher priority variant of the generic
> "aes" registered, the system will do exactly what you want.
>

hmm yes indeed it should do the job, but I don't see how you do that.
For example, let say I want to use "aes-foo" with eCryptfs. I can give
a higher priority to "aes-foo" than "aes" one. When eCryptfs asks for
a aes cipher it will pass "aes" name and since "aes-foo" has a higher
priority then the cypto core will return "aes-foo" cipher, right ? But
in this scheme, eCryptfs has not a higher priority than other kernel
users. How can I prevent others to use "aes-foo" ?

Actually I'd like to say "'aes-foo' is a cipher used by one and only
one user". That would allow aes-foo driver to no reload the same key
for each block and to be more efficient for my common case.

thanks
--
Francis
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-04-14 15:19    [W:0.152 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site