On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:52:06PM +0800, Anson Huang wrote:
> Add i.MX7 SNVS RTC clock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anson Huang
Looks fine to me. Ping me when clk driver part lands mainline.
Shawn
On 1 February 2018 at 10:21, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Create a new function attribute __optimize, which allows to specify an
> optimization level on a per-function basis.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven
Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel
On 1 February 2018 at 10:22, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> With gcc-4.1.2:
>
> crypto/sha3_generic.c:39: warning: ‘__optimize__’ attribute directive
> ignored
>
> Use the newly introduced __optimize macro to fix this.
>
> Fixes: 83dee2ce1ae791c3 ("crypto: sha3-generic -
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
>> wrote:
>>> Gcc versions before 4.4 do not
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:00 AM, Bryan O'Donoghue
wrote:
> From: Rui Miguel Silva
>
> Add CAAM clock so that we could use the Cryptographic Acceleration and
> Assurance Module (CAAM) hardware block.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rui Miguel Silva
On 1/31/2018 4:00 AM, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> commit 1005bccd7a4a ("crypto: caam - enable instantiation of all RNG4 state
> handles") introduces a control when incrementing ent_delay which contains
> the following comment above it:
>
> /*
> * If either SH were instantiated by somebody else
>
Hi Arnd,
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
>> Gcc versions before 4.4 do not recognize the __optimize__ compiler
>> attribute:
>>
>> warning: ‘__optimize__’ attribute
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
> Gcc versions before 4.4 do not recognize the __optimize__ compiler
> attribute:
>
> warning: ‘__optimize__’ attribute directive ignored
>
> Fixes: 7375ae3a0b79ea07 ("compiler-gcc.h: Introduce __nostackprotector
On 1/31/2018 4:00 AM, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> From: Rui Miguel Silva
>
> Add CAAM device node to the i.MX7s device tree.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rui Miguel Silva
> Cc: Shawn Guo
> Cc: Sascha Hauer
> Cc:
On 01-02-2018 15:55, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Feb 2018 12:07:21 +0200
> Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
>>> Am Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018, 10:35:07 CET schrieb Gilad Ben-Yossef:
>>>
>>>
On Thu, 1 Feb 2018 12:07:21 +0200
Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018, 10:35:07 CET schrieb Gilad Ben-Yossef:
> >
> > Hi Gilad,
> >
> >> >
> >> > Which works well for the
Create a new function attribute __optimize, which allows to specify an
optimization level on a per-function basis.
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven
---
I assume this is supported as of gcc-4.4:
- gcc version 4.3.3 (GCC): warning: ‘__optimize__’ attribute directive
Gcc versions before 4.4 do not recognize the __optimize__ compiler
attribute:
warning: ‘__optimize__’ attribute directive ignored
Fixes: 7375ae3a0b79ea07 ("compiler-gcc.h: Introduce __nostackprotector function
attribute")
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven
---
Can
With gcc-4.1.2:
crypto/sha3_generic.c:39: warning: ‘__optimize__’ attribute directive
ignored
Use the newly introduced __optimize macro to fix this.
Fixes: 83dee2ce1ae791c3 ("crypto: sha3-generic - rewrite KECCAK transform to
help the compiler optimize")
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven
Am Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018, 11:06:30 CET schrieb Gilad Ben-Yossef:
Hi Gilad,
> 2. Pointing out that the problem solved (and rightfully so) by mutex in
> AF_ALG AIO implementation must exists elsewhere as well - for example
> IPsec, and is probably solved there too, so if we add the flag as
>
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018, 10:35:07 CET schrieb Gilad Ben-Yossef:
>
> Hi Gilad,
>
>> >
>> > Which works well for the sort of optimization I did and for hardware that
>> > can do iv dependency tracking itself. If
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Stephan Mueller wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018, 10:35:07 CET schrieb Gilad Ben-Yossef:
>
> Hi Gilad,
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> >
>> > Quoting a private email from Stephan (at Stephan's suggestion)
>> >
>> >> What I however could fathom is that
Am Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018, 10:35:07 CET schrieb Gilad Ben-Yossef:
Hi Gilad,
> >
> > Which works well for the sort of optimization I did and for hardware that
> > can do iv dependency tracking itself. If hardware dependency tracking was
> > avilable, you would be able to queue up requests
Am Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018, 10:35:07 CET schrieb Gilad Ben-Yossef:
Hi Gilad,
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Jonathan Cameron
>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:51:40 +
> >
> > Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >> On
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Jonathan Cameron
wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:51:40 +
> Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 09:27:04 +0100
>> Stephan Müller wrote:
>
> A few clarifications
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:54:57AM -0800, Junaid Shahid wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:13 AM, Steffen Klassert
> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder which special usecase you have in mind that will be improved
> > by your patches.
> >
>
> This is not related to IPsec. We
21 matches
Mail list logo