Re: which one is broken: VIA padlock aes or aes_i586?

Herbert Xu wrote:
> I don't think this patch is your problem since it's part of the multiblock
> code which doesn't exist in 2.6.12 at all.  Of course the multiblock code
> itself could be buggy.  I'll take a look.

You're right, this doesn't make sense. I tried it with 2.6.15.4, and it works, 2.6.16-rc1 doesn't. In both cases no other AES algorithm than padlock was compiled into the kernel. I hope this helps.

BTW: 2.6.15 gives me a read performance increase of about 50% (hdparm -t) compared to 2.6.12, nice work!!

Michael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • which one is broken: VIA padlock aes or aes_i586?
    • From: Michael Heyse <[email protected]>
  • Re: which one is broken: VIA padlock aes or aes_i586?
    • From: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: promise sata 300 TX4 and Samsung HD (SP2004C) -> Sector errors
• Next by Date: Re: 2.6.16-rc4-mm1 kernel crash at bootup. parport trouble?
• Previous by thread: Re: [SOLVED] Re: which one is broken: VIA padlock aes or aes_i586?
• Next by thread: [ PATCH 2.6.16-rc3-xen 1/3] sysfs: export Xen hypervisor attributes to sysfs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]