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 846E4C6FD1C for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 06:01:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231891AbjCYGBM (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Mar 2023 02:01:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42150 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229448AbjCYGBK (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Mar 2023 02:01:10 -0400 Received: from 167-179-156-38.a7b39c.syd.nbn.aussiebb.net (167-179-156-38.a7b39c.syd.nbn.aussiebb.net [167.179.156.38]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 974D719685; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 23:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from loth.rohan.me.apana.org.au ([192.168.167.2]) by formenos.hmeau.com with smtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Debian)) id 1pfwx2-008XUY-Ph; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 14:00:29 +0800 Received: by loth.rohan.me.apana.org.au (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 25 Mar 2023 14:00:28 +0800 Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2023 14:00:28 +0800 From: Herbert Xu To: David Howells Cc: willy@infradead.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, hch@infradead.org, axboe@kernel.dk, jlayton@kernel.org, brauner@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 23/28] algif: Remove hash_sendpage*() Message-ID: References: <3763055.1679676470@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3763055.1679676470@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 04:47:50PM +0000, David Howells wrote: > > I must be missing something, I think. What's particularly optimal about the > code in hash_sendpage() but not hash_sendmsg()? Is it that the former uses > finup/digest, but the latter ony does update+final? A lot of hardware hashes can't perform partial updates, so they will always fall back to software unless you use finup/digest. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt