From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794344923; b=XDbICQdqo6bDycE2sxAo/J4bFFwPMwxVot/7wMxupTTcZ+SAPbqP2uETZnoEw7l7wUPv WkDq6gzC6eqnkFoZWCxt+HnvHMdbLn1NExSCVqulSAsGcnXiVj37TXMhtyhGsGzZJEt33 UScFlucaFBblT0MjGrbyUYaNYrJRmZFbS4vWxITwmTYFTSzF1NX0/mlzeBCGmxH71Mgjz anbOM4gUaJmZi4j+cFV0DqRTXt6grGFZvSlDwzNggrTnX3bHj6ahVFkDhdo8UhSCxIfcW rmRrPM/+iETERBZcpnmq5Bmz36en4SDq2GLPO17786UskMCvFQimyLohWNwIy7LcYUQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794344923; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition: Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To; bh=Wihr2MrF2FO793dTKH7ddHpRfNQ9adLzPWYI0Gv/j84=; b=V5oUhhcV43KuLX3R/Ia2/Ktq3k5C6UXQYyi8nAvIwNHh3KGfKtMsP+hO6Ov143AUAjWQ 1ZdzHLzP4HajSPaSDA3tRturzm96j31BO80/GMEv8gjk4axjgjC3vMT95eDRxf95oIE+H 3zEvRpMTcItRKUrsC1bpzrzrYYWbAiSeR8G6qMxIZFKrYLJL/gNjeu7toUECAx8YVaiy2 wpImnjza3xSVlyo6kCcwjgSMIjVdCiwC5MpCdLYTvFd9jEEzbxg/TTEFlin3hS4D+GhWF gK8YqeW1LtK+O+oT08/fkMNYOLUQMnyIz0Ojl7lPjR0+a8rLMJ5PmCyTuoaBl+bH50A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=YMVAf3zz; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7D46606A321; Tue, 10 Nov 2026 21:08:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=YMVAf3zz Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE4EB1F0089F; Tue, 10 Nov 2026 21:08:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1794344922; bh=Wihr2MrF2FO793dTKH7ddHpRfNQ9adLzPWYI0Gv/j84=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=YMVAf3zzQ0uqmVL+VbTBt+1JwkrNK+Qw1g08kq63UdwgwteUdVwp20F+rr1emd7Vt IvMeVGLIbRV9oE6BEbzcDenCSC3DirWr9GhZJLjENk4g51cUp/DpJzRwygXyzFX6VW 1HNSZQaAbAU7dSw9W5Di8cYnz712D2Ae5jk0XTeOguq4TUxW6KnWHGSALSsypJEICZ wtBaRKiKo1RI3Hmk4D8OXQDpRgdrOc9HJwOr+czsitqPSshhWE8TX0MWO5nVrl4RP1 SRy2vqLTkcGVCqwTjXDhahGcBbe9vg2BW03u2PtMbhRdo5N50kZW1Spftp6CcNWQbM 2gg5qJFmHgYqQ== Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 13:08:40 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Cc: Herbert Xu , "David S. Miller" , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto/arm64: sm4 - Drop cpu feature table for PMULL Message-ID: <20261110210840.GB1907@quark> References: <20261109161052.890682-2-u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20261109161052.890682-2-u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com> On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 05:10:52PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > The result of having that table is that the sm4-ce-gcm module is > autoloaded if the CPU supports the PMULL cpu feature. However that > module is only usefull if there are both SM4 and PMULL. The module is > already auto-loaded if the CPU has SM4 and calls sm4_ce_gcm_init() then > which fails without PMULL. > > So dropping the PMULL cpu feature table has the only affect that on > machines with PMULL but without SM4 the useless module isn't loaded any > more. > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König > --- > Hello, > > PSA: I don't know what these cpu features are and what the sm4-ce-gcm > module does. I just stumbled over that MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(cpu, ...) and > convinced myself by looking at the code about the above analysis. It > wouldn't be a big surprise to me if I missed something relevant. So > please apply some distrust before the patch. I guess this and your other patch look fine, if Herbert wants to apply them. Note that we've actually been moving away from having separate modules for the architecture-optimized crypto code, and when that happens to this code the MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE will go away anyway. - Eric