Re: [CRYPTO] is it really optimized ?

["Francis Moreau" <francis.moro@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On 4/14/07, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> It should be easy to restrict a crypto device so that it's used
> by one specific user.  That's why we have generic names ("aes") vs.
> specific ones ("aes-foo").
>
> So if you let the priority user pick "aes-foo" instead of "aes",
> and given that there is a higher priority variant of the generic
> "aes" registered, the system will do exactly what you want.

hmm yes indeed it should do the job, but I don't see how you do that.
For example, let say I want to use "aes-foo" with eCryptfs. I can give
a higher priority to "aes-foo" than "aes" one. When eCryptfs asks for
a aes cipher it will pass "aes" name and since "aes-foo" has a higher
priority then the cypto core will return "aes-foo" cipher, right ? But
in this scheme, eCryptfs has not a higher priority than other kernel
users. How can I prevent others to use "aes-foo" ?

Actually I'd like to say "'aes-foo' is a cipher used by one and only
one user". That would allow aes-foo driver to no reload the same key
for each block and to be more efficient for my common case.

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