Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] AES assembler implementation for x86_64

[Andreas Steinmetz <ast@domdv.de>]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> That is not specifically against this patch, but before we add another 
> AES implementation, I'd like to find a better solution for the general 
> AES selection.

That would be nice as I didn't like having to duplicate a whole Kconfig
entry which in fact means that it is triplicated now.
I'm fine with any solution here but I do believe whatever solution is
for the crypto maintainers to decide.

[snip]

>>+	depends on CRYPTO && (X86 && !X86_64)
>>+	depends on CRYPTO && X86 && !X86_64
>>...
> 
> 
> This doesn't make any difference.
> 
> I think the former version was better readable, but that's no strong 
> opinion.

This was only personal preference during development and actually you're
right, the former version is better readable.
-- 
Andreas Steinmetz                       SPAMmers use robotrap@domdv.de