lists.openwall.net   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  linux-cve-announce  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]
Message-ID: <YJF8/oaWUqZsWfOb@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 May 2021 09:57:34 -0700
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc:     herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] crypto: arc4: Implement a version optimized for
 memory usage

On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:29:46PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
> +#define S_type	u8
> +#else
> +#define S_type	u32
> +#endif
> +
>  struct arc4_ctx {
> -	u32 S[256];
> +	S_type S[256];
>  	u32 x, y;
>  };

Is it actually useful to keep both versions?  It seems we could just use the u8
version everywhere.  Note that there aren't actually any unaligned memory
accesses, so choosing the version conditionally on
CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS seems odd.  What are you trying to
determine by checking that?

- Eric

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ