[PATCH 6.6.y v3 0/5] crypto: talitos - fix rename first/last to first_desc/last_desc

[Goetz Goerisch <ggoerisch@gmail.com>]

Commit a1b80018b8cec27fc06a8b04a7f8b5f6cfe86eae
was backported to 6.6.y with a866e2b1c65edaee2e1bb1024ee2c761ced335f8
It renames last to last_desc but misses one occurrence which leads to compile errors on mpc85xx

drivers/crypto/talitos.c: In function 'ahash_digest':
drivers/crypto/talitos.c:2204:16: error: 'struct talitos_ahash_req_ctx' has no member named 'last'
 2204 | req_ctx->last = 1;
      |        ^~~~

Instead of renaming req_ctx->last, commit 9826d1d6ed5f8 ("crypto: talitos - stop
using crypto_ahash::init") should be applied.
Ideally before commit 00463d5f864a ("crypto: talitos - fix SEC1 32k ahash
request limitation") to avoid any compilation breakage and ensure correctness of
the code.
 
> > Greg could you please backport the mentioned commit to 6.6.y in the correct order for the next update?

> Can you send a series of backported patches in the correct order for us
> to apply, so we know to get them correct?  Trying to dig out from an
> email like this is usually quite easy to get wrong :)

> > We need a reason for a revert, AND a signed off-by line :(
> > Please fix that up for the other revert in this series and resend.

Thank you Greg for this feedback.

v2: add reason and SoB to revert commit which was missing.
v3: send correct patch set

Hope this is correct.
Goetz

Eric Biggers (1):
  crypto: talitos - stop using crypto_ahash::init

Goetz Goerisch (2):
  Revert "crypto: talitos - rename first/last to first_desc/last_desc"
  Revert "crypto: talitos - fix SEC1 32k ahash request limitation"

Paul Louvel (2):
  crypto: talitos - fix SEC1 32k ahash request limitation
  crypto: talitos - rename first/last to first_desc/last_desc

 drivers/crypto/talitos.c | 15 +++++++++------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)


base-commit: da47cbc254661aa66d61ef061485a7080305c4be
-- 
2.55.0