linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lib/crypto: tests: polyval_kunit: Increase iterations for preparekey in IRQs

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: <3527d9cb-9982-4302-a9ca-d7ac2a10ccaf@davidgow.net>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2026 19:53:07 +0800
From: David Gow <david@...idgow.net>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
 Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
 linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/crypto: tests: polyval_kunit: Increase iterations for
 preparekey in IRQs

Le 03/01/2026 à 2:27 AM, Eric Biggers a écrit :
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 08:32:03AM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
>> On my development machine the generic, memcpy()-only implementation of
>> polyval_preparekey() is too fast for the IRQ workers to actually fire.
>> The test fails.
>>
>> Increase the iterations to make the test more robust.
>> The test will run for a maximum of one second in any case.
>>
>> Fixes: b3aed551b3fc ("lib/crypto: tests: Add KUnit tests for POLYVAL")
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
> 
> Glad to see that people are running these tests!  I actually already
> applied
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20251219085259.1163048-1-davidgow@google.com/
> for this issue, which should be sufficient by itself.  Might be worth
> increasing the iteration count as well, but I'd like to check whether
> any other tests could use a similar change as well.
> 

The polyval one is the only one I got reliably, but I have just managed 
to reproduce this with crc.ctct10dif_test as well.

[19:47:29]     # crc_t10dif_test: EXPECTATION FAILED at 
include/kunit/run-in-irq-context.h:112
[19:47:29]     Expected state.hardirq_func_calls > 0, but
[19:47:29]         state.hardirq_func_calls == 0 (0x0)
[19:47:29]
[19:47:29] Timer function was not called
[19:47:29]     # crc_t10dif_test: EXPECTATION FAILED at 
include/kunit/run-in-irq-context.h:114
[19:47:29]     Expected state.softirq_func_calls > 0, but
[19:47:29]         state.softirq_func_calls == 0 (0x0)
[19:47:29]
[19:47:29] BH work function was not called
[19:47:29] [FAILED] crc_t10dif_test

It's only happening for me on aarch64, with hardware virtualisation (and 
it goes away if the crc test suite is the only one which gets run, 
interestingly).

And, of course, all of the issues go away with the patch applied / with 
-rc4.

Cheers,
-- David