On 6/7/07, Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 17:01:08 +1000 Herbert Xu <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:54:50AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > /me points at Herbert
> > Andrew would not add options between the "menuconfig CRYPTO" and
> > the "if CRYPTO" line... :)
>
> Actually this patch is not even in my tree :)
uh, OK, sorry.
> > Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/crypto/Kconfig
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.22-rc4.orig/crypto/Kconfig
> > +++ linux-2.6.22-rc4/crypto/Kconfig
> > @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@ menuconfig CRYPTO
> > help
> > This option provides the core Cryptographic API.
> >
> > +if CRYPTO
> > +
> > #
> > # Generic algorithms support
> > #
> > @@ -18,8 +20,6 @@ config XOR_BLOCKS
> > #
> > source "crypto/async_tx/Kconfig"
>
> Andrew, do you want me to pick the async_tx stuff up instead?
>
It would be very helpful to have a clear merge path for dmaengine
changes and the async offload api. Neil has been extremely helpful
reviewing the raid specific changes, and I received his "Acked-by" for
the changes to MD[1]. However I have thus far been unable to attract
someone to 'ack/nak' the async_tx api and the changes to drivers/dma/
[2]. Jeff commented on an early revision...
I have recently gravitated to Herbert and the crypto directory since
async_tx and crypto have some structural similarities [3].
I wouldn't recommend it. It's an ongoing source of bustage frankly, has a
habit of getting unpleasantly tangled with git-ioat.patch and afaik is
still awaiting a go-ahead from Neil.
Sorry, the crypto/Kconfig bustage was a goof on my part as I moved the
async_tx files from drivers/dma/, to the top-level directory, and
finally to crypto/. Hopefully these recent build breakages I have
caused in -mm have not put the series in too negative a light...
I was hoping the git-ioat.patch situation would be solved by me
rebasing my series on a version of mainline with Chris' changes
merged, but his attempts over the past two merge windows were ignored.
Should my series wait outside of -mm until git-ioat.patch makes
forward progress?
Overall, I feel that async_tx is perhaps justifiably receiving the
silent treatment because offload engines are not a mainstream
occurrence. Currently only people with an Xscale IOP or a PPC 440spe
[4] will notice that mainline lacks support for all the features of
their platform. I see async_tx as a nod to the embedded space where
offload engines act to make up for the absence of multi-Ghz CPUs with
streaming SIMD instructions.
Herbert's offer is greatly appreciated as it will give guidance to the
parts of the series outside of Neil's purview.
Regards,
Dan
[1]: The ack from Neil was in an offlist message for the MD specific
portion of the series
[2]: I asked DaveM and netdev to take a look at the two patches in the
series that change drivers/dma/ and net/core/dev.c since that was the
original merge path for I/OAT and dmaengine
[3]: async_tx is similar to crypto in that they both provide a library
of memory transforms that can in some cases be carried out by
hardware.
[4]: async_tx has attracted at least one other developer that I know
about to write a driver for their engines:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-raid&m=117400143317440&w=2
-
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/
[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]
