linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v7 6/9] scsi: ufs: Add inline encryption support to UFS

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:   Tue, 25 Feb 2020 15:21:25 +0800
From:   Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
        Satya Tangirala <satyat@...gle.com>,
        <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Barani Muthukumaran" <bmuthuku@....qualcomm.com>,
        Kuohong Wang <kuohong.wang@...iatek.com>,
        Kim Boojin <boojin.kim@...sung.com>,
        "Ladvine D Almeida" <Ladvine.DAlmeida@...opsys.com>,
        Parshuram Raju Thombare <pthombar@...ence.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/9] scsi: ufs: Add inline encryption support to UFS

Hi Christoph,

On Mon, 2020-02-24 at 15:37 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 09:47:36PM +0800, Stanley Chu wrote:
> > Yes, MediaTek is keeping work closely with inline encryption patch sets.
> > Currently the v6 version can work well (without
> > UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_CRYPTO quirk) at least in our MT6779 SoC platform
> > which basic SoC support and some other peripheral drivers are under
> > upstreaming as below link,
> > 
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mediatek/list/?state=%
> > 2A&q=6779&series=&submitter=&delegate=&archive=both
> > 
> > The integration with inline encryption patch set needs to patch
> > ufs-mediatek and patches are ready in downstream. We plan to upstream
> > them soon after inline encryption patch sets get merged.
> 
> What amount of support do you need in ufs-mediatek?  It seems like
> pretty much every ufs low-level driver needs some kind of specific
> support now, right?  I wonder if we should instead opt into the support
> instead of all the quirking here.

The patch in ufs-mediatek is aimed to issue vendor-specific SMC calls
for host initialization and configuration. This is because MediaTek UFS
host has some "secure-protected" registers/features which need to be
accessed/switched in secure world. 

Such protection is not mentioned by UFSHCI specifications thus inline
encryption patch set assumes that every registers in UFSHCI can be
accessed normally in kernel. This makes sense and surely the patchset
can work fine in any "standard" UFS host. However if host has special
design then it can work normally only if some vendor-specific treatment
is applied.

I think one of the reason to apply UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_CRYPTO quirk in
ufs-qcom host is similar to above case.

Thanks,
Stanley Chu