| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CO1PR18MB4538FAB1C3EC9DC4EF036C8BA8C79@CO1PR18MB4538.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sun, 8 May 2022 00:01:21 +0000
From: Xiaoming Zhou <xzhou@...vell.com>
To: "kbusch@...nel.org" <kbusch@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>, "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
"martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"colyli@...e.de" <colyli@...e.de>
Subject: [PATCHv3 06/10]crypto: add rocksoft 64b crc framework
Hi Keith,
For the polynomial you used in this path is 0x9A6C9329AC4BC9B5ULL, why it is different than the 0xAD93D23594C93659ULL defined in NVMe command set spec 5.2.1.3.4 ? Though the crc66 implemented in this patch can pass with test cases defined in Figure 121: 64b CRC Test Cases for 4KiB Logical Block with no Metadata. Could you explain the discrepancy between the spec and the patch?
Thanks,
Xiaoming
-----Original Message-----
From: Linux-nvme <linux-nvme-bounces@...ts.infradead.org> On Behalf Of linux-nvme-request@...ts.infradead.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 12:00 PM
To: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: [EXT] Linux-nvme Digest, Vol 95, Issue 129
External Email
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Send Linux-nvme mailing list submissions to
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.infradead.org_mailman_listinfo_linux-2Dnvme&d=DwICAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=i2QEdWf3G3LCjxQ2FY9geCmDX5uXEL6k-yI1XpluRMU&m=aO_Z5Vo-ZK5JNnkryiz1SPDNY97daT4vk4ofnRS3deDGItjh6hmpsmYhvngO8oj7&s=flu55Dn1W8d8Kpb07ZIOf9EiWvJEacADVUk_k10Fj8w&e=
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
linux-nvme-request@...ts.infradead.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
linux-nvme-owner@...ts.infradead.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Linux-nvme digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: [GIT PULL] nvme fixes for Linux 5.17 (Christoph Hellwig)
2. Re: [PATCHv3 04/10] linux/kernel: introduce lower_48_bits
macro (Joe Perches)
3. Re: [PATCHv3 06/10] crypto: add rocksoft 64b crc framework
(Eric Biggers)
4. Re: [PATCHv3 06/10] crypto: add rocksoft 64b crc framework
(Eric Biggers)
5. Re: [PATCHv3 06/10] crypto: add rocksoft 64b crc framework
(Eric Biggers)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 09:29:34 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Keith Busch
<kbusch@...nel.org>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, Sagi Grimberg
<sagi@...mberg.me>, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] nvme fixes for Linux 5.17
Message-ID: <YhUdfqXy0wCDQywm@...radead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:26:16AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Hmm?
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.kernel.dk_cgi
> t_linux-2Dblock_commit_-3Fh-3Dblock-2D5.17-26id-3D93e2c52d71a6067d08ee
> 927e2682e9781cb911ef&d=DwICAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=i2QEdWf3G3LCj
> xQ2FY9geCmDX5uXEL6k-yI1XpluRMU&m=aO_Z5Vo-ZK5JNnkryiz1SPDNY97daT4vk4ofn
> RS3deDGItjh6hmpsmYhvngO8oj7&s=vE-IaGHIXqznhuUOWrva610L8_iwmV2_3jo301Ps
> eEY&e=
Indeed. I somehow had a stale block-5.17 branch locally.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 10:43:21 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, colyli@...e.de, Bart Van Assche
<bvanassche@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 04/10] linux/kernel: introduce lower_48_bits
macro
Message-ID:
<603f9243bb9e1c4c50aaec83a527266b48ab9e20.camel@...ches.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
On Tue, 2022-02-22 at 08:56 -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 05:50:45PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:45:53AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2022-02-22 at 08:31 -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> > > > +/ *
> > > > + * lower_48_bits - return bits 0-47 of a number
> > > > + * @n: the number we're accessing */ #define lower_48_bits(n)
> > > > +((u64)((n) & 0xffffffffffffull))
> > >
> > > why not make this a static inline function?
> >
> > Agreed.
>
> Sure, that sounds good to me. I only did it this way to match the
> existing local convention, but I personally prefer the inline function
> too.
The existing convention is used there to allow the compiler to avoid warnings and unnecessary conversions of a u32 to a u64 when shifting by 32 or more bits.
If it's possible to be used with an architecture dependent typedef like dma_addr_t, then perhaps it's reasonable to do something like:
#define lower_48_bits(val) \
({ \
typeof(val) high = lower_16_bits(upper_32_bits(val)); \
typeof(val) low = lower_32_bits(val); \
\
(high << 16 << 16) | low; \
})
and have the compiler have the return value be an appropriate type.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 11:50:42 -0800
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, colyli@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 06/10] crypto: add rocksoft 64b crc framework
Message-ID: <YhU+kuMhueXVQvxe@....localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:31:40AM -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> +config CRYPTO_CRC64_ROCKSOFT
> + tristate "Rocksoft Model CRC64 algorithm"
> + depends on CRC64
> + select CRYPTO_HASH
> + help
> + Rocksoft Model CRC64 computation is being cast as a crypto
> + transform. This allows for faster crc64 transforms to be used
> + if they are available.
The first sentence of this help text doesn't make sense.
> diff --git a/crypto/crc64_rocksoft_generic.c
> b/crypto/crc64_rocksoft_generic.c new file mode 100644 index
> 000000000000..55bad1939614
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/crypto/crc64_rocksoft_generic.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +/*
> + * Cryptographic API.
The "Cryptographic API" line doesn't provide any helpful information.
> +static int chksum_final(struct shash_desc *desc, u8 *out) {
> + struct chksum_desc_ctx *ctx = shash_desc_ctx(desc);
> +
> + *(u64 *)out = ctx->crc;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int __chksum_finup(u64 crc, const u8 *data, unsigned int len,
> +u8 *out) {
> + *(u64 *)out = crc64_rocksoft_generic(crc, data, len);
> + return 0;
> +}
These 64-bit writes violate alignment rules and will give the wrong result on big endian CPUs. They need to use put_unaligned_le64().
> +static int __init crc64_rocksoft_x86_mod_init(void) {
> + return crypto_register_shash(&alg);
> +}
> +
> +static void __exit crc64_rocksoft_x86_mod_fini(void) {
> + crypto_unregister_shash(&alg);
> +}
This has nothing to do with x86.
> +config CRC64_ROCKSOFT
> + tristate "CRC calculation for the Rocksoft^TM model CRC64"
I'm sure what the rules for trademarks are, but kernel source code usually doesn't have the trademark symbol/abbreviation scattered everywhere.
> + select CRYPTO
> + select CRYPTO_CRC64_ROCKSOFT
> + help
> + This option is only needed if a module that's not in the
> + kernel tree needs to calculate CRC checks for use with the
> + rocksoft model parameters.
Out-of-tree modules can't be the reason to have a kconfig option. What is the real reason?
> +u64 crc64_rocksoft(const unsigned char *buffer, size_t len) {
> + return crc64_rocksoft_update(~0ULL, buffer, len); }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(crc64_rocksoft);
Isn't this missing the bitwise inversion at the end?
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Rocksoft model CRC64 calculation (library API)");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: crc64");
Shouldn't the MODULE_SOFTDEP be on crc64-rocksoft?
- Eric
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 11:54:31 -0800
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, colyli@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 06/10] crypto: add rocksoft 64b crc framework
Message-ID: <YhU/d6wn55/GWPxm@....localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 11:50:44AM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > +config CRC64_ROCKSOFT
> > + tristate "CRC calculation for the Rocksoft^TM model CRC64"
>
> I'm sure what the rules for trademarks are, but kernel source code
> usually doesn't have the trademark symbol/abbreviation scattered everywhere.
>
> > + select CRYPTO
> > + select CRYPTO_CRC64_ROCKSOFT
> > + help
> > + This option is only needed if a module that's not in the
> > + kernel tree needs to calculate CRC checks for use with the
> > + rocksoft model parameters.
>
> Out-of-tree modules can't be the reason to have a kconfig option.
> What is the real reason?
Also this option can be enabled without the CONFIG_CRC64 it depends on, which is broken.
- Eric
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 11:56:59 -0800
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, colyli@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 06/10] crypto: add rocksoft 64b crc framework
Message-ID: <YhVACzTEylUg5LJx@....localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:31:40AM -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> Hardware specific features may be able to calculate a crc64, so
> provide a framework for drivers to register their implementation. If
> nothing is registered, fallback to the generic table lookup
> implementation. The implementation is modeled after the crct10dif equivalent.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
> ---
> crypto/Kconfig | 9 +++
> crypto/Makefile | 1 +
> crypto/crc64_rocksoft_generic.c | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/crc64.h | 5 ++
> lib/Kconfig | 9 +++
> lib/Makefile | 1 +
> lib/crc64-rocksoft.c | 129 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 7 files changed, 258 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 crypto/crc64_rocksoft_generic.c create mode
> 100644 lib/crc64-rocksoft.c
I tried testing this, but I can't because it is missing a self-test:
[ 0.736340] alg: No test for crc64-rocksoft (crc64-rocksoft-generic)
[ 5.440398] alg: No test for crc64-rocksoft (crc64-rocksoft-pclmul)
All algorithms registered with the crypto API need to have a self-test (in crypto/testmgr.c).
- Eric
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.infradead.org_mailman_listinfo_linux-2Dnvme&d=DwICAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=i2QEdWf3G3LCjxQ2FY9geCmDX5uXEL6k-yI1XpluRMU&m=aO_Z5Vo-ZK5JNnkryiz1SPDNY97daT4vk4ofnRS3deDGItjh6hmpsmYhvngO8oj7&s=flu55Dn1W8d8Kpb07ZIOf9EiWvJEacADVUk_k10Fj8w&e=
------------------------------
End of Linux-nvme Digest, Vol 95, Issue 129
*******************************************
Powered by blists - more mailing lists