Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 17:19:34 +0300 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Jumbo 1 release On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 07:44:01PM +0530, Sayantan Datta wrote: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 7:26 PM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: > > > > I say go for it! Perhaps consider cherry-picking first or both of > > Sayantan's patches that are in the descrypt-test-amd branch though (as > > mentioned in the descrypt issue now) > > I was planning to create two separate paths(compile-time) for those two > patches but it would require some testing regarding which device should > follow which path. Since we don't have time, patch1 have 0 goto statements, > hence more reliable but performance is somewhat poor. Just how poor is it? When running one or several --fork'ed processes? > If you agree, I'll > push a polished version of patch1 to bleeding-jumbo. I think we should revisit this for -jumbo-2. Not now. Thanks! Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.