netdev - Re: [PATCH] mac80211: aead api to reduce redundancy

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]

Date:   Tue, 10 Oct 2017 22:31:32 -0400
From:   Xiang Gao <qasdfgtyuiop@...il.com>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: aead api to reduce redundancy

2017-10-09 3:09 GMT-04:00 Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>:
> On Sun, 2017-10-08 at 01:43 -0400, Xiang Gao wrote:
>>
>> By the way, I'm still struggling on how to run unit tests. It might
>> take time for me to make it run on my machine.
>
> I can run it easily, so don't worry about it too much. Running it is of
> course much appreciated, but I don't really want to go and require that
> right now, it takes a long time to run.
>
> If you do want to set it up, I suggest the vm scripts (hostap
> repository in tests/hwsim/vm/ - you can use the kernel .config there as
> a base to compile a kernel and then just kick it off from there, but it
> can take a while to run.

Thanks for your help on this. This information is actually very helpful to me.

Since the unit test is not required, I will put working on this patch
higher priority than unit tests. I will send out patches without
running unit tests for now before I can make it run on my computer.
But I'm still interested in trying to run it on my computer after I
finish this patch.

I will send PATCH v3 soon.

Thanks

>
>> Hmm... good question. The reason is, aes_ccm.c and aes_gcm.c was
>> almost exact copy of each other. But they have different copyright
>> information.
>> The copyright of aes_ccm.c was:
>>
>> Copyright 2006, Devicescape Software, Inc.
>> Copyright 2003-2004, Instant802 Networks, Inc.
>>
>> and the copyright of aes_gcm.c was:
>>
>> Copyright 2014-2015, Qualcomm Atheros, Inc.
>>
>> I just don't know how to write the copyright for the new aead_api.c,
>> so I does not put anything there.
>
> Heh, good point. Well, I guess we can pretend it wasn't already copied
> before and just "keep" both.
>
> johannes