Re: [PATCH] crypto: qce - Replace with stub driver

Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-crypto,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-arm-msm,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID <CAMRc=McL5QQRk8C8zzkHm+FUj-SAVi5PLJr2pXo8eNpaxXuALg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 19:12:42 +0200, Eric Biggers <[email protected]> said:

> Well, that again brings us back to the core issue which is the actual
> current functionality of the driver, which is to register crypto_ahash,
> crypto_skcipher, and crypto_aead algorithms with the crypto API.
>
> It isn't useful functionality, but rather just a footgun that allows
> users to misconfigure their systems, an issue I've seen happen multiple
> times.  CPU-based implementations of *every one* of those algorithms
> already exist.  On a typical SoC that has this hardware, the CPU-based
> implementations are ~50x faster as shown in tests.  Pending patches make
> the difference even greater at ~100x.  And the CPU-based implementations
> actually use significantly less CPU time, as well.  There seems to be no
> path forward for significantly fixing this issue, either.
>

You've repeated your point about performance several times. Nobody ever said
you're wrong. Performance is not the only reason for choosing one provider over
another.

> An alternative we could consider is dropping the cra_priority further,
> to further decrease the chance that these algorithms are used.  But I
> feel it's hard to justify why they're there at all, if the rationale for
> keeping them is "we made sure that no one can actually use them, so they
> can't be causing problems anymore"...
>

No, the rationale has never been this. FWIW it can be that it's used for
testing of the crypto module on a supported platform and that is already
enough of a reason to keep it upstream.

As I've said before: we don't just drop maintained drivers from linux.

Herbert: it's been a while, would you mind chiming in and deciding one way
or the other, as Greg seems to have deferred to your judgement?

Thanks,
Bartosz
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.