On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 8:54 PM David Howells <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Still not really sure what the point is.  There's only one user of
> > > > crypto_sig, and it could just call the ML-DSA functions directly.
> > >
> > > Is it your aim to kill off the crypto/ dir and all the (old) crypto API?
> >
> > Probably entirely killing off the old API is going to be fraught
> > because its abstraction has leaked out to userspace. But to the extent
> > we can minimize its use over time, I think that's a good thing. Even
> > for crypto usages that generalize to a few different ciphers of one
> > variety or another, I think being explicit about which ciphers and
> > having purpose-built dispatchers is usually a better route.
>
> How are you proposing handling the autoloading feature of the old API?

I don't know. Not all features will have direct replacements. Not all
usages will be replaced. Not all use cases benefit from being
replaced. You asked if it was an "aim." I replied by telling you that
I think killing it is going to be difficult, but that over time, usage
will decline. I think that'll be a natural thing. For now, when
something uses the library API, there's a pretty easy and obvious case
to be made for it, as there are still such obvious low hanging use
cases. I suppose in a while, we might run out of those perhaps. But
that hasn't happened yet, I guess.

Jason

Reply via email to