linux-kernel - Re: x86/csum: Remove unnecessary odd handling

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: <CAHk-=wj1fe4Pa0zLxUTiMjaxEXW84HBup+Hv=fe-U8PoFzrm5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2023 10:44:37 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@...il.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
        edumazet@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: x86/csum: Remove unnecessary odd handling

On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 at 08:32, Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Linus, if you're planning a patch and want to just integrate the codes
> here I'm happy drop this patch

No, that patch looks good to me.

In fact, I wasn't planning on integrating my patch at all. I literally
did it as a "I would have done it this way instead" exercise.

And while I am currently running with my patch in the kernel, I don't
even really know if it works and does the right thing. Maybe my use
doesn't even trigger csum_partial() at all. I did not do any testing
that "yes, I get the same checksum as a result".

So

 (a) removing the pointless one-byte alignment looks good to me.

 (b) I'd actually hope that somebody who _cares_ about this path and
has put some real work into it (as opposed to my "superficial
dabbling") would look at my patch and either go "yeah, not worth it",
or "looks good, I'll take it".

and I'm including that final patch of mine here again in case there
was any confusion with the earlier versions (there were at least two
known-broken versions I posted).

*If* somebody likes it, and verifies that the checksum result is
correct, feel free to do anything with that patch, including adding my
signed-off-by for it (or taking the credit all for yourself -
Mwahahahahaahaa!)

              Linus

View attachment "0001-Silly-csum-improvement.-Maybe.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (3423 bytes)