From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e39.co.us.ibm.com (e39.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.160]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e39.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "GeoTrust SSL CA" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E6F12C0090 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 2013 07:55:57 +1000 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e39.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 15:55:55 -0600 Received: from d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (d01relay01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.233]) by d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EEE538C8027 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 17:55:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r72LtpjK124364 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 17:55:51 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r72LtpsD013014 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 17:55:51 -0400 Message-ID: <1375480550.32477.19.camel@what-is-leg> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/crypto/nx: saves chaining value from co-processor From: Fionnuala Gunter To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 16:55:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1375477741.15999.23.camel@pasglop> References: <1375477090.32477.10.camel@what-is-leg> <1375477741.15999.23.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 07:09 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2013-08-02 at 15:58 -0500, Fionnuala Gunter wrote: > > The chaining value from co-processor was not being saved. This value is > > needed because it is used as the IV, for example by cts i.e. > > cts(cbc(aes)). > > > > Signed-off-by: Fionnuala Gunter > > Signed-off-by: Marcelo Cerri > > So now you guys are sending the patch to linuxppc-dev and not the crypto > list .. > > I need to understand things better here. Any reason why those drivers > aren't handled by the crypto maintainer ? > > Ben. Sorry, I thought linuxppc-dev was the right tree since the patch is for a ppc driver and you've carried previous nx driver submissions upstream. I want to submit to the proper place, so what is your preference? -Fin