[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1232077045.13948.14.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:37:25 +0800
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: roel kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com>,
Sebastian Siewior <linux-crypto@...breakpoint.cc>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH crypto -v4 2/2] AES-NI: Add support to Intel AES-NI
instructions for x86_64 platform
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 11:26 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:37:02AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> >
> > But after checking blkcipher_walk_done() in 2.6.28, If input argument
> > err != 0 and walk->flags & BLKCIPHER_WALK_SLOW != 0, when
> > blkcipher_walk_done() return non-zero, walk->nbytes != 0. So I think it
> > is a little fragile to use walk->nbytes == 0 indicate error.
>
> Right, that's a bug. Although this case shouldn't occur unless
> wer have a buggy algorithm (that's why it's a WARN_ON). But as
> we're handling it anyway, we should ensure that the result is sane.
>
> crypt: blkcipher - Fix WARN_ON handling in walk_done
>
> When we get left-over bits from a slow walk, it means that the
> underlying cipher has gone troppo. However, as we're handling
> that case we should ensure that the caller terminates the walk.
>
> This patch does this by setting walk->nbytes to zero.
>
> Reported-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
I think Roel Kluin is the real reporter.
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists