On 12/21/21 9:55 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

Question is how to continue from here; I can easily rebase my 
patchset
and send it relative to Nicolais patches. But then we'll be bound to
the acceptance of those patches, so I'm not quite sure if that's the
best way to proceed.

Don't know if we have a choice here... What is the alternative you are
proposing?

That's the thing, I don't really have a good alternative, either.
It's just that I have so no idea about the crypto subsystem, and
consequently wouldn't know how long we need to wait...

But yeah, Nicolais patchset is far superior to my attempts, so I'd be
happy to ditch my preliminary attempts there.

Can we get a sense from the crypto folks to the state of Nicolais
patchset?

According to Nicolai things look good, rules seem to be that it'll be
accepted if it has positive reviews (which it has) and no-one objected
(which no-one did).
Other than that one would have to ask the maintainer.
Herbert?

Any updates on this?

Sigh.

Herbert suggested reworking the patch, and make ffdhe a separate 
algorithm (instead of having enums to specify the values for the 
existing DH algorithm).
Discussion is ongoing :-(

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke                Kernel Storage Architect
hare@suse.de                              +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer