From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: samitolvanen@google.com (Sami Tolvanen) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:21:20 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] arm: crypto: Add NEON optimized SHA-256 In-Reply-To: <550843B4.8080903@openssl.org> References: <20150316154835.GA31336@google.com> <20150316162304.GA35408@google.com> <550843B4.8080903@openssl.org> Message-ID: <20150317152120.GA31053@google.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 04:09:40PM +0100, Andy Polyakov wrote: > I have no problems with reusing assembly modules in kernel context. Awesome, thank you for clarifying this. > I'd prefer if it can be arranged in way similar to bsaes-armv7 module, > i.e. we work together on shared copy of module that generates assembly > that can be then compiled for OpenSSL or kernel. Is it sensible? Sure, that sounds good to me. > BTW, why stop at SHA256? There is SHA512 and NEON SHA1... The kernel already has NEON SHA-1 and SHA-512, but for some reason is lacking SHA-256. I have not tested how they compare to yours though. Sami