netdev - Re: [PATCH] crypto: aesni-intel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 2014 08:26:51 +0100
From:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	Ming Liu <ming.liu@...driver.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<ying.xue@...driver.com>, <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: aesni-intel - avoid IPsec re-ordering

On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 11:15:50AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 09:41:38AM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> >
> > Everything below the local_bh_enable() should not run in atomic context
> > as the subsequent functions may set the CRYPTO_TFM_REQ_MAY_SLEEP flag.
> 
> Actually I'm thinking of doing exactly that (disabling softirq in
> cryptd) to fix the reordering problem.
> 
> Most threads do not use the FPU/SIMD so cryptd is only ever needed
> when we have a user-space app that touches the FPU/SIMD which then
> gets an interrupt to perform crypto in softirq.  So forcing cryptd
> on everyone just because some apps touch the FPU/SIMD is a non-
> starter.
> 
> The most straightforward solution is to always defer to cryptd once
> it gets started.  This is bad because if a rarely used app that
> touches FPU/SIMD runs then we'll end up stuck in cryptd long after
> the app goes away.
> 
> So what I'm thinking of is to have the softirq path forcibly regain
> control from cryptd where possible.  This is tricky because cryptd
> might be in the middle of processing a request.  So that's why I'd
> like to disable softirqs while we're processing a request.
> 

What about to use a fallback algorithm that does not need to touch
FPU/SIMD in such cases? We would not need cryptd at all and it would
keep the requests in the right order because we don't defer them.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html