On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:55 PM, Corentin LABBE <clabbe.montj...@gmail.com> wrote: > Le 15/11/2014 00:59, Andrew Bresticker a écrit : >> Hi James, >> >>> + >>> +struct img_hash_drv { >>> + struct list_head dev_list; >>> + spinlock_t lock; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +static struct img_hash_drv img_hash = { >>> + .dev_list = LIST_HEAD_INIT(img_hash.dev_list), >>> + .lock = __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(img_hash.lock), >>> +}; >> >> It looks like the only purpose of this list is to get the >> corresponding struct img_hash_dev in img_hash_init(). If there's >> never going to be multiple instances within an SoC, perhaps you could >> just use a global? Otherwise, you could do something like the >> qualcomm driver, see drivers/crypto/qce/sha.c. It looks like there is >> some precedent for this device list though... >> > > I don't understand, you propose to use a global, something that lots of > people want to be removed in my driver. > It is not better than this global list. > > I have the fealing that there no good way to get a pointer to a driver > structure inside the cryptoAPI. > What to you think about adding a void *data in struct crypto_alg > > Before registering an alg you could do: > mv_aes_alg_ecb.data = myprivatedriverdata; > ret = crypto_register_alg(&mv_aes_alg_ecb); > > and then get it via > struct crypto_priv *cp = req->base.tfm->__crt_alg->data; > (a function will be better than that)
That sounds good to me. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html