[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu-3zzN=cikd4PftCVo2fJi9t_0kqZHBQncjokYQV5wVnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 16:11:37 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Iuliana Prodan <iuliana.prodan@....com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Horia Geanta <horia.geanta@....com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: gcm - fix cacheline sharing
On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 15:58, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:45:47PM +0000, Iuliana Prodan wrote:
> >
> > On the current structure of caamalg, to work, iv needs to be copied
> > before memcpy(iv, req->iv, ivsize), from skcipher_edesc_alloc function.
> > For this we need edesc, but this cannot be allocated before knowing how
> > much memory we need. So, to make it work, we'll need to modify more in CAAM.
>
> All the copying does is:
>
> if (ivsize)
> scatterwalk_map_and_copy(req->iv, req->src, req->cryptlen -
> ivsize, ivsize, 0);
>
> Why do you need to allocate the edesc before doing this?
>
Because that is where the incoming iv is currently consumed. Copying
it out like this wipes the input IV from memory.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists