Re: VIA ACE patch
Pawel Jakub Dawidek <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.crypto |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 03:16:22PM -0500, Miles Nordin wrote: > >>>>> "ddk" == Daniel de Kok <[email protected]> writes: > > ddk> Just for clarity: these VIA CPUs just have additional > ddk> instructions, so the kernel opencrypto "driver" and the > ddk> OpenSSL padlock engine are not mutually exclusive. > > right. so, in Linux there are posts in the forums that even after > they added padlock support to OpenSSL, OpenSSL does not choose the > right ``engine'' by default. They had to go through and modify each > individual program, ssh, apache, u.s.w., to get it to use the > padlock-based openssl-engine. > > Will OpenSSL in NetBSD 4.0/-current use the additional instructions by > default? Or will it use /dev/crypto, or regular i386 algorithms, by > default? sounds like you almost have to do some careful performance > testing just to be reasonably sure the whole stack is glued together > and actually working. Not sure about NetBSD, but in FreeBSD you can doing by simply not having /dev/crypto. You IPsec will still be accelerated, but userland will use padlock directly. The all you need is not to load cryptodev.ko module and not compile-in 'device cryptodev'. -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl [email protected] http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am!
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 187 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFp++aForvXbEpPzQRAl97AKCV8DEX++qOcMLRwbJzh4vQeSCyYQCgskxw JAbLUoFEv900u8NlDQr2sSs= =6OSn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----