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  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:   Mon, 18 Feb 2019 15:07:51 +0000
From:   Julien Grall <>
To:     Dave Martin <>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>
Cc:     Ard Biesheuvel <>,
        linux-arm-kernel <>,,
        Catalin Marinas <>,
        Will Deacon <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] arm64/fpsimd: Don't disable softirq when touching


On 14/02/2019 10:34, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 05:52:27PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> On 2019-02-13 16:40:00 [+0100], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>> This is equal what x86 is currently doing. The naming is slightly
>>>>> different, there is irq_fpu_usable().
>>>> Yes, I think it's basically the same idea.
>>>> It's been evolving a bit on both sides, but is quite similar now.
>>> may_use_simd() only exists because we have a generic crypto SIMD
>>> helper, and so we needed something arch agnostic to wrap around
>>> irq_fpu_usable()
>> My question was more if this is helpful and we want to keep or if
>> it would be better to remove it and always disable BH as part of SIMD
>> operations.
> Wouldn't this arbitrarily increase softirq latency?  Unconditionally
> forbidding SIMD in softirq might make more sense.  It depends on how
> important the use cases are...

Looking at the commit message from cb84d11e1625 "arm64: neon: Remove support for 
nested or hardirq kernel-mode NEON", one of the use case for crypto in softirq 
is certain mac80211 drivers.

Is there any other use case for use crypto in softirqs?


Julien Grall

Powered by blists - more mailing lists