[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc2bbc3b-8a34-2f09-41f5-60f1568a6bef@bytedance.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 18:17:21 +0800
From: zhenwei pi <pizhenwei@...edance.com>
To: "Gonglei (Arei)" <arei.gonglei@...wei.com>
Cc: "jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"mst@...hat.com" <mst@...hat.com>,
"virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"helei.sig11@...edance.com" <helei.sig11@...edance.com>,
"herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] virtio-crypto: implement RSA algorithm
On 2/18/22 11:12 AM, zhenwei pi wrote:
>>> +void virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs_unregister(struct virtio_crypto
>>> +*vcrypto) {
>>> + int i = 0;
>>> +
>>> + mutex_lock(&algs_lock);
>>> +
>>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs); i++) {
>>> + uint32_t service = virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].service;
>>> + uint32_t algonum = virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].algonum;
>>> +
>>> + if (virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].active_devs == 0 ||
>>> + !virtcrypto_algo_is_supported(vcrypto, service, algonum))
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + if (virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].active_devs == 1)
>>> +
>>> crypto_unregister_akcipher(&virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].algo);
>>> +
>>> + virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].active_devs--;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + mutex_unlock(&algs_lock);
>>> +}
>>
>> Why don't you reuse the virtio_crypto_algs_register/unregister functions?
>> The current code is too repetitive. Maybe we don't need create the new
>> file virtio_crypto_akcipher_algo.c
>> because we had virtio_crypto_algs.c which includes all algorithms.
>>
>
> Yes, this looks similar to virtio_crypto_algs_register/unregister.
>
> Let's look at the difference:
> struct virtio_crypto_akcipher_algo {
> uint32_t algonum;
> uint32_t service;
> unsigned int active_devs;
> struct akcipher_alg algo;
> };
>
> struct virtio_crypto_algo {
> uint32_t algonum;
> uint32_t service;
> unsigned int active_devs;
> struct skcipher_alg algo; /* akcipher_alg VS skcipher_alg */
> };
>
> If reusing virtio_crypto_algs_register/unregister, we need to modify the
> data structure like this:
> struct virtio_crypto_akcipher_algo {
> uint32_t algonum;
> uint32_t service; /* use service to distinguish
> akcipher/skcipher */
> unsigned int active_devs;
> union {
> struct skcipher_alg skcipher;
> struct akcipher_alg akcipher;
> } alg;
> };
>
> int virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs_register(struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto)
> {
> ...
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs); i++) {
> uint32_t service = virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].service;
> ...
> /* test service type then call
> crypto_register_akcipher/crypto_register_skcipher */
> if (service == VIRTIO_CRYPTO_SERVICE_AKCIPHER)
>
> crypto_register_akcipher(&virtio_crypto_akcipher_algs[i].algo.akcipher);
> else
>
> crypto_register_skcipher(&virtio_crypto_skcipher_algs[i].algo.skcipher);
> ...
> }
> ...
> }
>
> Also test service type and call
> crypto_unregister_skcipher/crypto_unregister_akcipher.
>
> This gets unclear from current v2 version.
>
> On the other hand, the kernel side prefers to separate skcipher and
> akcipher(separated header files and implementations).
>
Hi, Lei
I also take a look at other crypto drivers at qat/ccp/hisilicon, they
separate akcipher/skcipher algo. If you consider that reusing
virtio_crypto_algs_register/unregister seems better, I will try to merge
them into a single function.
--
zhenwei pi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists