From: Andy Polyakov <ap...@openssl.org> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 22:02:55 +0200
> Basically, in the context I'd prefer not to touch aes-sparcv9.pl and > stick to "aesni" approach as the only one, i.e. keep T4 code as > separate module referred from EVP. It allows to concentrate on > things that matter, optimizing specific modes performance. By > extension it's preferred approach even for other ciphers. Too many pieces of code stil call interfaces such as AES_*() directly and do not go through EVP. This I considered a show stopper, and an absolute failure of design with the way the Oracle folks implemented crypto opcode support in their openssl changes. It is absolutely impractical to have an EVP only driver for this stuff. I consider supporting the old APIs a requirement. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
