netdev - RE: [RFC crypto v3 8/9] chtls: Register the ULP

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:   Sun, 28 Jan 2018 05:55:55 +0000
From:   Atul Gupta <atul.gupta@...lsio.com>
To:     Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>
CC:     "herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ganeshgr@...lsio.co" <ganeshgr@...lsio.co>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "Boris Pismenny" <borisp@...lanox.com>,
        Ilya Lesokhin <ilyal@...lanox.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC crypto v3 8/9] chtls: Register the ULP



-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Watson [mailto:davejwatson@...com] 
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 2:39 AM
To: Atul Gupta <atul.gupta@...lsio.com>
Cc: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au; linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org; ganeshgr@...lsio.co; netdev@...r.kernel.org; davem@...emloft.net; Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>; Ilya Lesokhin <ilyal@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC crypto v3 8/9] chtls: Register the ULP

<1513769897-26945-1-git-send-email-atul.gupta@...lsio.com>

On 12/20/17 05:08 PM, Atul Gupta wrote:
> +static void __init chtls_init_ulp_ops(void) {
> +	chtls_base_prot			= tcp_prot;
> +	chtls_base_prot.hash		= chtls_hash;
> +	chtls_base_prot.unhash		= chtls_unhash;
> +	chtls_base_prot.close		= chtls_lsk_close;
> +
> +	chtls_cpl_prot			= chtls_base_prot;
> +	chtls_init_rsk_ops(&chtls_cpl_prot, &chtls_rsk_ops,
> +			   &tcp_prot, PF_INET);
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.close		= chtls_close;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.disconnect	= chtls_disconnect;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.destroy		= chtls_destroy_sock;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.shutdown		= chtls_shutdown;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.sendmsg		= chtls_sendmsg;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.recvmsg		= chtls_recvmsg;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.sendpage		= chtls_sendpage;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.setsockopt	= chtls_setsockopt;
> +	chtls_cpl_prot.getsockopt	= chtls_getsockopt;
> +}

Much of this file should go in tls_main.c, reusing as much as possible. For example it doesn't look like the get/set sockopts have changed at all for chtls.

Agree, should common code and anything other than TLS_BASE_TX/TLS_SW_TX prot should go in vendor specific file/driver. Since, prot require redefinition for hardware the code is kept in chtls_main.c

> +
> +static int __init chtls_register(void) {
> +	chtls_init_ulp_ops();
> +	register_listen_notifier(&listen_notifier);
> +	cxgb4_register_uld(CXGB4_ULD_TLS, &chtls_uld_info);
> +	tcp_register_ulp(&tcp_chtls_ulp_ops);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void __exit chtls_unregister(void) {
> +	unregister_listen_notifier(&listen_notifier);
> +	tcp_unregister_ulp(&tcp_chtls_ulp_ops);
> +	chtls_free_all_uld();
> +	cxgb4_unregister_uld(CXGB4_ULD_TLS);
> +}

The idea with ULP is that there is one ULP hook per protocol, not per driver.  

One thought is that apps/lib calling setsockopt pass the required ulp type [tls or chtls or xtls], this enables any HW assist to define base_prot as required and keep common code [tls_main] independent of underlying HW. 
If we are to have single TLS ULP hook [good from user point] then need a way to determine which Inline tls hw is used? System with multiple Inline TLS capable hw and differing functionality would require checks in tls_main to exercise that specific functionality/callback?