From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tadeusz Struk Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: algif - Mark sgl end at the end of data Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:03:00 -0800 Message-ID: <547C8324.4000801@intel.com> References: <20141128184036.11421.36028.stgit@tstruk-mobl1> <20141201144026.GA18008@gondor.apana.org.au> <547C80F5.6000006@intel.com> <20141201150010.GA18277@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:12122 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753864AbaLAPF6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2014 10:05:58 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20141201150010.GA18277@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/01/2014 07:00 AM, Herbert Xu wrote: > As I said the two are arbitrary and we don't place any restrictions > on them at all (apart from the fact that the TX length in bytes must > obviously be longer than the RX bytes). > > So you can have a 1-element TX list with a multi-element RX list. Ok, I can look at the data, but do you think the idea with marking the end of data in TX sgl is worthwhile or should I just forget about it. Another question is - is an sgl with lots of empty buffers a valid input from an algorithm implementation point of view? Thanks, Tadeusz