[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150605035747.GC527@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 11:57:47 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>
Cc: Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Stephan Mueller <smueller@...onox.de>
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH 5/13] crypto: testmgr - Switch to new AEAD interface
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 03:15:19PM -0700, Tadeusz Struk wrote:
> Hi Herbert,
> On 05/22/2015 01:30 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > This patch makes use of the new AEAD interface which uses a single
> > SG list instead of separate lists for the AD and plain text.
>
> The fact the src and assoc point to the same sgl causes some inconsistency. The input I'm getting is:
> req->old = 1
> req->src_nents = 1
> req->src_len = 80
> req->dst_nents = 1
> req->dst_len = 80
> req->assoclen = 0
>
> but
>
> req->assoc_nents = 1
> req->assoc_len = 80
>
> I presume req->assoc is obsolete now and drivers need to use req->assoclen. right?
> Currently I just loop over req->assoc to get the AD.
Existing AEAD implementations should be completely unaware of
the new interface because we recreate the old req->assoc in the
crypto API.
However, if you are creating a new AEAD implementation then yes
you should stop using req->assoc and fetch it from req->src instead.
Cheers,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists