Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 19:03:43 -0500 From: Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: MFC question Message-ID: <5696E5DF.7080202@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] I was considering MFC'ing this commit to stable/10: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=292782 It replaces the kernel implementation of SHA512 (sys/crypto/sha2/sha2.c) with cperciva@'s version from libmd. In benchmarks it was 5-30% faster, on x86_64 and arm/mips. But, in head I ended up being asked to bump __FreeBSD_version because it removes sys/crypto/sha2.h which was apparently used by a 3rd party driver, and replaces it with sys/crypto/sha512.h Does this kind of change mean it cannot be MFCd to stable/10? Or is it ok to MFC it? -- Allan Jude [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJWluXtAAoJEBmVNT4SmAt+tFMP/2airytOpdJm0x1GGsyuvX5D Z3tK+DLjv1xD7RzjxDB6yh2ZGzQQr+KLDFa39hNGEdyCJGv7tjQ85K+Qx1InDHTy SBxUM6cPdXRKvSRzXMfjWMV0SrvOAVYYw3pGoHr8zujS/Cmbe7VtP5ozlD61xOIA Xn4xD+dBUkXYgQyEFC8IkrD+rs80e/2YTzUnKSYM9WWCWE8yotYlVYv2vlmgouT0 u3ZRjsrP/XqCmwibyi6GrW1SaS/i0BdRXOJ0x/trrbjK7ihwVAWC0tOQO7SLlZBx YLhV3IucaPOQYrYPip/gSkodopKJnNXeBheTGC3VidL9y3aLREDWMjYp3+7nqHl6 QlxV9SBjiwNw/DjR8XTRu3vHH/TQqIBMYSxhNuVbXVXAzuxdjXIyUEZ3DvYl1InF gnotIeaMNSjMxzfYJhdLd6F7n+tsJGxLx1LUaLtorMx3JP/u9f/7lj54AK7fdMDm Sn9U2eAJkeb8ZDvs+DSqFanwenZ4wPkZx5tJKQ7E3wJZlUf0CTFoDOmwQNYantMU C2fIdoHBXcNnzvYW7hSa1pzQGG/BUSbJcV56L9J6XyOZrD15RSalSbmsNCRvxUab dHDgSQ/HcSlM5D+uaaHBAsNyqUi7iJ6+Sufm5UV5GYBmMtiYbTnbw2K8vtNFB+Qs q4yUlp3ug5KhYdbM9XfQ =HD69 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5696E5DF.7080202>