On Sat, Jun 07, 2025 at 05:47:02PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > On Sat, Jun 07, 2025 at 01:04:42PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > Having arch-specific code outside arch/ was somewhat controversial when > > Zinc proposed it back in 2018. But I don't think the concerns are > > warranted. It's better from a technical perspective, as it enables the > > improvements mentioned above. This model is already successfully used > > in other places in the kernel such as lib/raid6/. The community of each > > architecture still remains free to work on the code, even if it's not in > > arch/. At the time there was also a desire to put the library code in > > the same files as the old-school crypto API, but that was a mistake; now > > that the library is separate, that's no longer a constraint either. > > I can't express how happy I am to see this revived. It's clearly the > right way forward and makes it a lot simpler for us to dispatch to > various arch implementations and also is organizationally simpler. > > Jason
Thanks! Can I turn that into an Acked-by? - Eric
