royzah commented on PR #20193: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/20193#issuecomment-5750670172
@xiaoxiang781216 one question before I leave this, so I get it right next time: was the objection the location? Every AES backend in the tree is chip-specific (`stm32h7/stm32_aes.c`, `esp32/esp32_aes.c`, `sam34/sam_aes.c`), and `arch/arm64/src/common/` holds only core arch support, no device drivers. I put it there because the Armv8 extension is architectural rather than a chip peripheral, but that does cut against the convention. Or was it that the crypto extension is optional in Armv8-A and arm64 has no runtime detection, so a kernel built with it faults on a core without it? Happy either way, just want the reason rather than a guess. Reopen if it is worth reshaping. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
