linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] crypto: lib - move crypto_simd_disabled_for

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: <Ytj5244/eVaDZ7Bz@sol.localdomain>
Date:   Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:01:47 -0700
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:     linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] crypto: lib - move crypto_simd_disabled_for_test
 into utils

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 09:34:23PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 08:32:55PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > Hi Eric,
> > 
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:29:20PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
> > > 
> > > Move the definition of crypto_simd_disabled_for_test into
> > > lib/crypto/utils.c so that it can be accessed by library code.
> > > 
> > > This is needed when code that is shared between a traditional crypto API
> > > implementation and a library implementation is built-in, but
> > > CRYPTO_ALGAPI=m.  The x86 blake2s previously was an example of this
> > > (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220517033630.1182-1-gaochao49@huawei.com/T/#u).
> > > Although that case was resolved by removing the blake2s shash support,
> > > this problem could easily come back in the future, so let's address it.
> > 
> > I'm not sure I see the reason in general for a utility library rather
> > than doing these piecemeal like the rest of lib functions. Why is crypto
> > special here? But in particular to this patch: nothing is actually using
> > crypto_simd_disabled_for_test in lib/crypto, right? So is this
> > necessary?
> 
> Well, this is what Herbert wanted:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/YtEgzHuuMts0YBCz@gondor.apana.org.au.  It's
> subjective, but for now I think I prefer this approach too, since the utility
> functions are so small and are widely used.  A whole module is overkill for just
> a few lines of code.
> 
> The commit message answers your second and third questions.
> 

Herbert, any thoughts on this?

Note: I forgot to put a MODULE_LICENSE in the new module, so I'll need to resend
this patchset even if there are no other issues.

- Eric