linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/1] crypto API: RSA algorithm patch (kernel version 2.6.20.1)

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0703201734300.20032@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
Date:	Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:36:18 +0100 (MET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
cc:	Tasos Parisinos <t.parisinos@...ensis.com>,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/1] crypto API: RSA algorithm patch (kernel
 version 2.6.20.1)


On Mar 20 2007 10:15, Matt Mackall wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 04:44:01PM +0200, Tasos Parisinos wrote:
>> >>+    /* Pre-allocate some auxilliary mpis */
>> >>+    rsa_echo("Preallocating %lu bytes for auxilliary operands\n",
>> >>+         RSA_AUX_SIZE * RSA_AUX_COUNT * sizeof(_u32));
>> >
>> >And printk.
>> 
>> i made such a printk wrapper not to mess with all the printk instances when 
>> i needed to
>> does this hurt, to be left as is?
>
>It's not horrible, but it's not pretty either.

printk(KERN_DEBUG ...) I say.

>> >>+#define RSA_AUX_COUNT         CONFIG_RSA_AUXCOUNT
>> >>+#define RSA_AUX_SIZE         CONFIG_RSA_AUXSIZE
>> >
>> >Just use the config value.
>> >
>> >>+#define RSA_MAX_U32        0xFFFFFFFF
>> >
>> >I'm sure we've got this somewhere.
>> 
>> if you could tell me i will fix it
>
>Hmmm, odd. I can't find one. There are plenty of things that roll
>their own though.

#include <linux/kernel.h>
#define UINT32_T_MAX ((uint32_t)UINT_MAX)

s/RSA_MAX_U32/UINT32_T_MAX/g perhaps?

>And we often skip such prototypes entirely if the .c file can be
>ordered such that no forward declarations are necessary.

Even if <shrug> deallocation functions come before initialisation?


Jan
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/