Jivin Eran Ben-Avi lays it down ... ... > > I have made a few small changes to your patch so it should be safe on > > 2.4 systems yet still select tasklets on 2.6 automatically. > > > > Could you have a look at it ? I have done some basic testing here > > and it seems ok, haven't checked your performance increases yet ;-) > > > Sorry for the late response. > It seems to be ok. I will test it more intensely in the next few days.
No problems, I have it sitting there ready to go :-) Cheers, Davidm > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > > > Index: openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_rcv.h > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_rcv.h,v > > retrieving revision 1.13 > > diff -u -r1.13 ipsec_rcv.h > > --- openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_rcv.h 26 Jun 2007 > > 06:28:52 > > > -0000 1.13 > > +++ openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_rcv.h 26 Sep 2007 > > 14:17:25 > > > -0000 > > @@ -149,6 +149,9 @@ > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_KLIPS_OCF > > struct work_struct workq; > > +#ifdef DECLARE_TASKLET > > + struct tasklet_struct tasklet; > > +#endif > > #endif > > #ifndef NET_21 > > struct net_device *devp; > > Index: openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_xmit.h > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_xmit.h,v > > retrieving revision 1.9 > > diff -u -r1.9 ipsec_xmit.h > > --- openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_xmit.h 26 Jun > > 2007 > > > 05:26:25 -0000 1.9 > > +++ openswan/linux/include/openswan/ipsec_xmit.h 26 Sep > > 2007 > > > 14:17:25 -0000 > > @@ -140,6 +140,9 @@ > > int next_state; > > #ifdef CONFIG_KLIPS_OCF > > struct work_struct workq; > > +#ifdef DECLARE_TASKLET > > + struct tasklet_struct tasklet; > > +#endif > > #endif > > #ifdef CONFIG_KLIPS_ALG > > struct ipsec_alg_auth *ixt_a; > > Index: openswan/linux/net/ipsec/ipsec_ocf.c > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: openswan/linux/net/ipsec/ipsec_ocf.c,v > > retrieving revision 1.27 > > diff -u -r1.27 ipsec_ocf.c > > --- openswan/linux/net/ipsec/ipsec_ocf.c 11 Jul 2007 00:35:01 > > -0000 > > > 1.27 > > +++ openswan/linux/net/ipsec/ipsec_ocf.c 26 Sep 2007 14:17:25 -0000 > > @@ -56,7 +56,11 @@ > > #define USE_BATCH 1 /* enable batch mode */ > > #define USE_CBIMM 1 /* enable immediate callbacks */ > > #define FORCE_QS 0 /* force use of queues for continuation > > of > > > state machine */ > > - > > +#ifdef DECLARE_TASKLET > > +#define USE_TASKLET 1 /* use tasklet for continuation of > > state > > > machine */ > > +#else > > +#define USE_TASKLET 0 /* don't use tasklet for continuation of > > state > > > machine */ > > +#endif > > /* > > * Because some OCF operations are synchronous (ie., > > software > > > encryption) > > * we need to protect ourselves from distructive re-entry. All we do > > @@ -83,15 +87,21 @@ > > (*sm)(arg); \ > > }) > > > > -#if FORCE_QS == 0 > > - #define PROCESS_NEXT(wq, wqsm, sm, arg) \ > > +#if USE_TASKLET == 1 > > + #define PROCESS_NEXT(this, wqsm, sm) ({ \ > > + tasklet_init(&this->tasklet, \ > > + (void (*)(unsigned long)) sm, (unsigned long)this); \ > > + tasklet_schedule(&this->tasklet); \ > > + }) > > +#elif FORCE_QS == 0 > > + #define PROCESS_NEXT(this, wqsm, sm) \ > > if (in_interrupt()) { \ > > - PROCESS_LATER(wq, wqsm, arg); \ > > + PROCESS_LATER(this->workq, wqsm, this); \ > > } else { \ > > - PROCESS_NOW(sm, arg); \ > > + PROCESS_NOW(sm, this); \ > > } > > #else > > - #define PROCESS_NEXT(wq, wqsm, sm, arg) PROCESS_LATER(wq, > > wqsm, > > > arg) > > + #define PROCESS_NEXT(this, wqsm, sm) > > PROCESS_LATER(this->workq, > > > wqsm, this) > > #endif > > > > /* > > @@ -218,6 +228,7 @@ > > return 1; > > } > > > > +#if USE_TASKLET == 0 > > #if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,20) > > static void > > ipsec_rsm_wq(struct work_struct *work) > > @@ -228,6 +239,7 @@ > > #else > > #define ipsec_rsm_wq ipsec_rsm > > #endif > > +#endif /* USE_TASKLET */ > > > > static int > > ipsec_ocf_rcv_cb(struct cryptop *crp) > > @@ -235,7 +247,6 @@ > > struct ipsec_rcv_state *irs = (struct > > ipsec_rcv_state > > > *)crp->crp_opaque; > > > > KLIPS_PRINT(debug_rcv, "klips_debug:ipsec_ocf_rcv_cb\n"); > > - > > if (irs == NULL) { > > KLIPS_PRINT(debug_rcv, "klips_debug:ipsec_ocf_rcv_cb: " > > "NULL irs in callback\n"); > > @@ -273,7 +284,7 @@ > > crp = NULL; > > > > /* setup the rest of the processing now */ > > - PROCESS_NEXT(irs->workq, ipsec_rsm_wq, ipsec_rsm, irs); > > + PROCESS_NEXT(irs, ipsec_rsm_wq, ipsec_rsm); > > return 0; > > } > > > > @@ -396,6 +407,7 @@ > > return(IPSEC_RCV_PENDING); > > } > > > > +#if USE_TASKLET == 0 > > #if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,20) > > static void > > ipsec_xsm_wq(struct work_struct *work) > > @@ -406,6 +418,7 @@ > > #else > > #define ipsec_xsm_wq ipsec_xsm > > #endif > > +#endif /* USE_TASKLET */ > > > > static int > > ipsec_ocf_xmit_cb(struct cryptop *crp) > > @@ -445,7 +458,7 @@ > > crp = NULL; > > > > /* setup the rest of the processing now */ > > - PROCESS_NEXT(ixs->workq, ipsec_xsm_wq, ipsec_xsm, ixs); > > + PROCESS_NEXT(ixs, ipsec_xsm_wq, ipsec_xsm); > > return 0; > > } > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > -- David McCullough, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ph:+61 734352815 Secure Computing - SnapGear http://www.uCdot.org http://www.cyberguard.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html