On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 09:03:45AM +0000, Gonglei (Arei) wrote: > Hi, > > > > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:43:10PM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 03:04:55PM +0800, Longpeng (Mike) wrote: > > > > I'm one of Gonglei's virtio-crypto project members, and we plan to add a > > AF_ALG > > > > backend for virtio-crypto(there's only builtin-backend currently). > > > > > > > > I found that Catalin, Paolo and Stefan had discussed about this in 2015 > > > > (http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg115457.html), but it seems that > > Catalin > > > > didn't do it, so I'm confuse about wether it is need to add a AF_ALG > > backend. > > > > > > > > Do you have any suggestion? Thanks :) > > > > > > I have no objections to an AF_ALG backend in QEMU. > > > > Rather than do another backend for virtio-crypto, IMHO, we should have > > an AF_ALG impl of the crypto/ APIs. That way any potential performance > > benefits will enhance our LUKS encryption code too. > > > According to the currently schemas of crypto/ APIs, we can't choose the > specific backend dynamically. This is a limitation for virtio-crypto > device I think.
Do we really need to be able to choose the backend explicitly. If the AF_ALG backend is faster, why would you simply not use that automatically if it is available. I'm not seeing an obvious need for dynamically choosing between backends. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
