[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1581463439.5125.72.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:23:59 -0500
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
ebiggers@...nel.org
Cc: linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] crypto: rename sm3-256 to sm3 in hash_algo_name
On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 16:49 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-02-10 at 20:44 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> > The name sm3-256 is defined in hash_algo_name in hash_info, but the
> > algorithm name implemented in sm3_generic.c is sm3, which will cause
> > the sm3-256 algorithm to be not found in some application scenarios of
> > the hash algorithm, and an ENOENT error will occur. For example,
> > IMA, keys, and other subsystems that reference hash_algo_name all use
> > the hash algorithm of sm3.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> The "hash_map" needs to be updated to reflect this change.
>
> static struct tpm2_hash tpm2_hash_map[] = {
> {HASH_ALGO_SHA1, TPM_ALG_SHA1},
> {HASH_ALGO_SHA256, TPM_ALG_SHA256},
> {HASH_ALGO_SHA384, TPM_ALG_SHA384},
> {HASH_ALGO_SHA512, TPM_ALG_SHA512},
> {HASH_ALGO_SM3_256, TPM_ALG_SM3_256},
> };
Never mind, the enum name "HASH_ALGO_SM3_256" didn't change. Just the
string changed.
Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists