From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A18C4167D for ; Fri, 3 Nov 2023 06:33:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230163AbjKCGdG (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2023 02:33:06 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36418 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230328AbjKCGdF (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2023 02:33:05 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x629.google.com (mail-ej1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::629]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52E931B9 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 23:32:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x629.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-9becde9ea7bso562477366b.0 for ; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:32:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; t=1698993175; x=1699597975; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=VyO1Z+S61kc8i/PizQbBIUgo6r//ondY8h0vjsIi3rI=; b=VW3j1xQ7TfWnVS5CQUvuXuRug9aMR4VjwGkaDd+ILQLGHJ49mF9aNafAQNZb9tb0pH OakWaouChUX28UgHtDppKSH210ULPs3bVnTSSqMwFZiSSDN2bhGMKuYKlqYuWcfuUcQG /Q11BJEzBhvWJwelbIkWVDjgcLLQx31zlMDak= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1698993175; x=1699597975; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=VyO1Z+S61kc8i/PizQbBIUgo6r//ondY8h0vjsIi3rI=; b=KjepRA4tE6DWJhom12ElrBzcwOAXRFpzd8fjhlEV/995jy1bNnZkpEXM6Vya6Gdw5T 9oarPcxwTTG5EcGk9x5S/3X3pOTK0cFJAaYkv5/tpeUyoKE2eGlLvp1EvUgL6s2FZVVf AeGlw1dAxRcybHefBnTqg+RDQ1Ohu6dTJY04RAUp1p93g12l0lQm8X3CbvogAd2m7VNR shm/mOhIrn6Ek8XvOLkaasBDVoWX3qhr7rbrllPKJAd74l0eErSV3CM2IsT/Yd426lUy vQkq08KNJZ6cmzZEQ/DEarYPNhUwI4caFL/5ffZWKWhss7HO6hOVfrubW5EP9GwMikUt QrxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxqf/cOwhyqAXc5OAfnhmoFkJMXH8iHcaovpSgpD5QEEVbDxMuJ oKQOjIDMbjhYZImzxOahm7LXV+G55mOl6HjkM0O32s8y X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGI3nZVqlSyjgs+GLGLktNY52LrX5zj/tJVenZ2chPbIguu2/5mfhhazS2CkbR0QNBnY/bDeA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:74d4:b0:9b2:cee1:1f82 with SMTP id z20-20020a17090674d400b009b2cee11f82mr1528370ejl.7.1698993175333; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ej1-f42.google.com (mail-ej1-f42.google.com. [209.85.218.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i11-20020a170906698b00b0098669cc16b2sm533562ejr.83.2023.11.02.23.32.54 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-f42.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-9c3aec5f326so558443766b.1 for ; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:32:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4fca:b0:9bd:a66a:a22 with SMTP id i10-20020a1709064fca00b009bda66a0a22mr2119584ejw.15.1698993173801; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:32:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2023 20:32:36 -1000 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Crypto Update for 6.7 To: Herbert Xu Cc: "David S. Miller" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Crypto Mailing List , Steffen Klassert Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 19:52, Herbert Xu wrote: > > Fair enough. How about adding an EXPERT dependency on this? I think that would help the situation, but I assume the sizing for the jitter buffer is at least partly due to trying to account for cache sizing or similar issues? Which really means that I assume any static compile-time answer to that question is always wrong - whether you are an expert or not. Unless you are just building the thing for one particular machine. So I do think the problem is deeper than "this is a question only for experts". I definitely don't think you should ask a regular user (or even a distro kernel package manager). I suspect it's likely that the question is just wrong in general - because any particular one buffer size for any number of machines simply cannot be the right answer. I realize that the commit says "*allow* for configuration of memory size", but I really question the whole approach. But yes - hiding these questions from any reasonable normal user is at least a good first step. Linus