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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD071C00449 for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 13:53:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750842087D for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 13:53:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 750842087D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nod.at Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728859AbeJEUwA (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2018 16:52:00 -0400 Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([195.201.40.130]:58654 "EHLO lithops.sigma-star.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728278AbeJEUwA (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2018 16:52:00 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8BEC60A3578; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 15:53:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lithops.sigma-star.at [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id wMTqvY68N0wF; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 15:53:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 674C160A357F; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 15:53:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lithops.sigma-star.at [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id RstBbJB_xAbx; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 15:53:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from blindfold.localnet (213-47-184-186.cable.dynamic.surfer.at [213.47.184.186]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE2A360A3578; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 15:53:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Richard Weinberger To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Cc: Richard Weinberger , Eric Biggers , Ard Biesheuvel , Herbert Xu , LKML , Netdev , Linux Crypto Mailing List , David Miller , Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 00/23] WireGuard: Secure Network Tunnel Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 15:53:07 +0200 Message-ID: <7854782.OKhPC64esT@blindfold> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Freitag, 5. Oktober 2018, 15:46:29 CEST schrieb Jason A. Donenfeld: > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 3:38 PM Richard Weinberger > wrote: > > So we will have two competing crypo stacks in the kernel? > > Having a lightweight crypto API is a good thing but I really don't like the idea > > of having zinc parallel to the existing crypto stack. > > No, as you've seen in this patchset, the dynamic dispatch crypto API > can trivially be done on top of Zinc. So each time we introduce a new > primitive to Zinc that's also in the dynamic dispatch API, we > reimplement the current crypto API in terms of Zinc. Check out the two > patches in this series that do this; it's quite clean and sleek. This is why I was asking. Your statement and the code didn't match for me. > > And I strongly vote that Herbert Xu shall remain the maintainer of the whole > > crypto system (including zinc!) in the kernel. > > No, sorry, we intend to maintain the code we've written. But I am > amenable to taking a tree-route into upstream based on whatever makes > most sense with merge conflicts and such. So, you will be a sub-maintainer below Herbert's crypto, that's fine. What you wrote sounded like a parallel world... Thanks, //richard