linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7] dm-verity: hash blocks with shash import+finup when possible

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: <CAMj1kXF2iCVboRR=6_2OnKYVf4+d3XHvgfwz21mWccxCVnOxeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 15:17:41 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev, Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, 
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] dm-verity: hash blocks with shash import+finup when possible

On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 at 19:16, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Ard,
>
> On Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 09:41:19AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > >  int verity_hash(struct dm_verity *v, struct dm_verity_io *io,
> > >                 const u8 *data, size_t len, u8 *digest, bool may_sleep)
> > >  {
> > > -       struct ahash_request *req = verity_io_hash_req(v, io);
> > >         int r;
> > > -       struct crypto_wait wait;
> > > -
> > > -       r = verity_hash_init(v, req, &wait, may_sleep);
> > > -       if (unlikely(r < 0))
> > > -               goto out;
> > >
> > > -       r = verity_hash_update(v, req, data, len, &wait);
> > > -       if (unlikely(r < 0))
> > > -               goto out;
> > > +       if (static_branch_unlikely(&ahash_enabled) && !v->shash_tfm) {
> >
> > Is the static key really worth the hassle? Couldn't this just be
> >
> > if (unlikely(!v->shash_tfm)) {
> >
> > so that the ahash logic is moved to the cold path? We need to
> > dereference v->shash_tfm right away in any case, and if it is never
> > NULL, the branch predictor should be able to remember that.
>
> The value of the static key is indeed marginal.  I included it because of the
> precedent of dm-verity's existing use_bh_wq_enabled static key, which exists for
> a similar purpose.  As long as we're going through the trouble of doing that, I
> think it makes sense to use the same pattern for ahash too.  It's another rarely
> needed option that can be patched in in the very rare case that it's needed.
>

If it's an existing pattern, fair enough.