From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030690AbXDNNPT (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Apr 2007 09:15:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030417AbXDNNPS (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Apr 2007 09:15:18 -0400 Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.239]:5793 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030403AbXDNNPO (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Apr 2007 09:15:14 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=RHFfFReTT2/yoC/tw0uQra07+5r0c9erN11WkIqjAAnRqGnZGj/p8tEHPAw3WIMDlbTDeiPCVWZvu9yKBsVx6mqIbkLY+LmF1DlE5KYhhiyToAx4U2+Wyl2+4JolIrprJY10fnw2Gbd2qmty7JlcdaOH2/ZjvTf1SUWO7NRy4SU= Message-ID: <38b2ab8a0704140615y2ba8145bmd3c2316a41d99265@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 15:15:13 +0200 From: "Francis Moreau" To: "Herbert Xu" Subject: Re: [CRYPTO] is it really optimized ? Cc: helge.hafting@aitel.hist.no, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <38b2ab8a0704130630v4c840bd1w19f2a239f86a93b@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 4/14/07, Herbert Xu wrote: > It should be easy to restrict a crypto device so that it's used > by one specific user. That's why we have generic names ("aes") vs. > specific ones ("aes-foo"). > > So if you let the priority user pick "aes-foo" instead of "aes", > and given that there is a higher priority variant of the generic > "aes" registered, the system will do exactly what you want. > hmm yes indeed it should do the job, but I don't see how you do that. For example, let say I want to use "aes-foo" with eCryptfs. I can give a higher priority to "aes-foo" than "aes" one. When eCryptfs asks for a aes cipher it will pass "aes" name and since "aes-foo" has a higher priority then the cypto core will return "aes-foo" cipher, right ? But in this scheme, eCryptfs has not a higher priority than other kernel users. How can I prevent others to use "aes-foo" ? Actually I'd like to say "'aes-foo' is a cipher used by one and only one user". That would allow aes-foo driver to no reload the same key for each block and to be more efficient for my common case. thanks -- Francis