[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJdqs4Rf=RvRtzQavT0oAtEEWppmjJRFRhLL4iQfCkVnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 22:30:36 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com>,
Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>,
Arnaud Ebalard <arno@...isbad.org>,
Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...il.com>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
linux-crypto <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] crypto: skcipher: Remove VLA usage
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> RFC follow-up to https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAGXu5j+bpLK=EQ9LHkO8V=sdaQwt==6fbGhgn2Vi1E9_WxSGRQ@mail.gmail.com
>
> The core API changes:
>
> struct crypto_sync_skcipher
> crypto_alloc_sync_skcipher()
> crypto_free_sync_skcipher()
> crypto_sync_skcipher_setkey()
> skcipher_request_set_sync_tfm()
> SKCIPHER_REQUEST_ON_STACK type check
>
> and a single user's refactoring as an example:
>
> drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp-crypto.h
> drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp-crypto-aes-xts.c
>
> Does this look correct? If so, I can continue and do the other 60
> instances of SKCIPHER_REQUEST_ON_STACK().
Herbert, how does this look? Should I do the other 60 instances? I'd
really like to get this finished up. :)
Thanks!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists