On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, Harald Welte wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 09:32:14AM -0400, Geoff Thorpe wrote: > > > > I don't think there's any taboo or a strong opposition against > > > > the patch. It's just that Andy hasn't followed up, I sort of > > > > given up and moved to other projects and the whole thing has > > > > gone forgotten. > > > > > > Ok. I hope after my re-merge and testing we can get it integrated > > > this time. > > > > BTW, my memory is vague here, is this Padlock block only able to do > > one-shot hashing? > > Yes, in all current CPU's (up to the C7), it is. > > There's a beatiful workaround by Michal and Andy which they have > implemented in phe_sum by making the process page fault every time > they need to copy in a new buffer (since the PHE is context-switch > safe).
I'd call it a "clever hack" rather than a "beautiful workaround". IMO playing with SEGV handlers inside a library like libcrypto is begging to be bitten by unintended consequences. -d ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
