search for: ablk_req

...t; @@ -0,0 +1,474 @@ [..] > + > +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) > +{ > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > + unsigned long flags; > + unsigned int len; > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > + int error; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking on the whole device? OK, it seems you use only one dataqueue, so it may not be that relevant. > + do { > + vir...

...t; @@ -0,0 +1,474 @@ [..] > + > +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) > +{ > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > + unsigned long flags; > + unsigned int len; > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > + int error; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking on the whole device? OK, it seems you use only one dataqueue, so it may not be that relevant. > + do { > + vir...

...struct skcipher_request *req, int err); static void virtio_crypto_dataq_sym_callback @@ -59,7 +60,7 @@ static void virtio_crypto_dataq_sym_callback { struct virtio_crypto_sym_request *vc_sym_req = container_of(vc_req, struct virtio_crypto_sym_request, base); - struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; + struct skcipher_request *ablk_req; int error; /* Finish the encrypt or decrypt process */ @@ -79,8 +80,8 @@ static void virtio_crypto_dataq_sym_callback error = -EIO; break; } - ablk_req = vc_sym_req->ablkcipher_req; - virtio_crypto_ablkcipher_finalize_req(vc_sym_req, + ab...

...struct skcipher_request *req, int err); static void virtio_crypto_dataq_sym_callback @@ -59,7 +60,7 @@ static void virtio_crypto_dataq_sym_callback { struct virtio_crypto_sym_request *vc_sym_req = container_of(vc_req, struct virtio_crypto_sym_request, base); - struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; + struct skcipher_request *ablk_req; int error; /* Finish the encrypt or decrypt process */ @@ -79,8 +80,8 @@ static void virtio_crypto_dataq_sym_callback error = -EIO; break; } - ablk_req = vc_sym_req->ablkcipher_req; - virtio_crypto_ablkcipher_finalize_req(vc_sym_req, + ab...

...rtio/virtio_crypto_core.c @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ #include "virtio_crypto_common.h" -static void +void virtcrypto_clear_request(struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req) { if (vc_req) { @@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) break; } ablk_req = vc_req->ablkcipher_req; - virtcrypto_clear_request(vc_req); spin_unlock_irqrestore( &vcrypto->data_vq[qid].lock, flags); /* Finish the encrypt or decrypt process */ - ablk_req->base.complete(&ablk_req->base, error); + virtio_crypto_ablkcipher_finaliz...

...rtio/virtio_crypto_core.c @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ #include "virtio_crypto_common.h" -static void +void virtcrypto_clear_request(struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req) { if (vc_req) { @@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) break; } ablk_req = vc_req->ablkcipher_req; - virtcrypto_clear_request(vc_req); spin_unlock_irqrestore( &vcrypto->data_vq[qid].lock, flags); /* Finish the encrypt or decrypt process */ - ablk_req->base.complete(&ablk_req->base, error); + virtio_crypto_ablkcipher_finaliz...

...o_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) < > > +{ < > > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; < > > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; < > > + unsigned long flags; < > > + unsigned int len; < > > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; < > > + int error; < > > + < > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); < > < > Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock < > like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking on the whole < > device? OK, it seems you use only on...

...o_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) < > > +{ < > > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; < > > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; < > > + unsigned long flags; < > > + unsigned int len; < > > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; < > > + int error; < > > + < > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); < > < > Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock < > like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking on the whole < > device? OK, it seems you use only on...

...gt; +{ > > < > > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > > < > > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > > < > > + unsigned long flags; > > < > > + unsigned int len; > > < > > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > > < > > + int error; > > < > > + > > < > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); > > < > > > < > Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock > > < > like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking...

...gt; +{ > > < > > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > > < > > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > > < > > + unsigned long flags; > > < > > + unsigned int len; > > < > > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > > < > > + int error; > > < > > + > > < > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); > > < > > > < > Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock > > < > like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking...

v7: - fix "BUG: smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code" reported by Halil, using get_cpu/put_cpu instead of calling smp_processor_id() directly. - fix a possible spinlock recursion in virtcrypto_dataq_callback(), we should release the spinlock before invoking the callback. - rebase on the latest kernel master tree. v6: - add patch 1/2 to make sparc architecture

v7: - fix "BUG: smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code" reported by Halil, using get_cpu/put_cpu instead of calling smp_processor_id() directly. - fix a possible spinlock recursion in virtcrypto_dataq_callback(), we should release the spinlock before invoking the callback. - rebase on the latest kernel master tree. v6: - add patch 1/2 to make sparc architecture

...t; > +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) > > +{ > > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > > + unsigned long flags; > > + unsigned int len; > > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > > + int error; > > + > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); > > Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock > like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking on the whole > device? OK, it seems you use only one dataqueue, so it > may not be...

...eue *vq) > < > > +{ > < > > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > < > > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > < > > + unsigned long flags; > < > > + unsigned int len; > < > > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > < > > + int error; > < > > + > < > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); > < > > < > Would it make sense to use a per virtqueue lock > < > like in virtio_blk for example instead of locking on the whole > < > d...

...pto_common.h" > + > + > +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) > +{ > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > + unsigned long flags; > + unsigned int len; > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > + int error; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); > + do { > + virtqueue_disable_cb(vq); > + while ((vc_req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)) != NULL) { > + if (vc_req->type == VIRTIO_CRYPTO_SYM_OP_CIPHER) { > + switch (vc_req->status) {...

...pto_common.h" > + > + > +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) > +{ > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > + unsigned long flags; > + unsigned int len; > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > + int error; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); > + do { > + virtqueue_disable_cb(vq); > + while ((vc_req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)) != NULL) { > + if (vc_req->type == VIRTIO_CRYPTO_SYM_OP_CIPHER) { > + switch (vc_req->status) {...

...t; > +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) > > +{ > > + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; > > + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; > > + unsigned long flags; > > + unsigned int len; > > + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; > > + int error; > > + > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); > > + do { > > + virtqueue_disable_cb(vq); > > + while ((vc_req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)) != NULL) { > > + if (vc_req->type == VIRTIO_CRYPTO_SYM_OP_CIPHER) { >...

...irtio_crypto.h> +#include "virtio_crypto_common.h" + + +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) +{ + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; + unsigned long flags; + unsigned int len; + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; + int error; + + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); + do { + virtqueue_disable_cb(vq); + while ((vc_req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)) != NULL) { + if (vc_req->type == VIRTIO_CRYPTO_SYM_OP_CIPHER) { + switch (vc_req->status) { + case VIRTIO_CRYPTO_OK: + error...

...irtio_crypto.h> +#include "virtio_crypto_common.h" + + +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) +{ + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; + unsigned long flags; + unsigned int len; + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; + int error; + + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); + do { + virtqueue_disable_cb(vq); + while ((vc_req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)) != NULL) { + if (vc_req->type == VIRTIO_CRYPTO_SYM_OP_CIPHER) { + switch (vc_req->status) { + case VIRTIO_CRYPTO_OK: + error...

...irtio_crypto.h> +#include "virtio_crypto_common.h" + + +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq) +{ + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv; + struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req; + unsigned long flags; + unsigned int len; + struct ablkcipher_request *ablk_req; + int error; + + spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->lock, flags); + do { + virtqueue_disable_cb(vq); + while ((vc_req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)) != NULL) { + if (vc_req->type == VIRTIO_CRYPTO_SYM_OP_CIPHER) { + switch (vc_req->status) { + case VIRTIO_CRYPTO_OK: + error...