From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933108AbcBBPYW (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2016 10:24:22 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:59549 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752394AbcBBPYU (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2016 10:24:20 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,385,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="645918764" From: Rui Wang To: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au Cc: rui.y.wang@intel.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] crypto: testmgr - Add a test case for import()/export() Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 23:03:40 +0800 Message-Id: <1454425420-20656-1-git-send-email-rui.y.wang@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.5.4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 10:45 PM Herbert Xu wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:16:34PM +0800, Rui Wang wrote: > > > > I initially made it unconditional, but then I found that it can easily > > hang the machine during boot due to any import/export bug in any of > > the hash drivers. So I used this .partial flag to guard against this > > risk. Only when an author is confident that his driver can do this > > test, should he add this flag. What do you think? > > Well if they're buggy they may crash anyway. Considering that all the buggy > drivers have probably been disabled for the time being I'd say let's make it > unconditional. You are right the ahash drivers are already disabled. The shash drivers using cryptd or mcryptd are probably OK by now. I'll do some tests. Thanks Rui