netdev - RE: Using the aesni generic gcm(aes) aead in atomic context

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, 31 Oct 2017 07:23:35 +0000
From:   Ilya Lesokhin <ilyal@...lanox.com>
To:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "sd@...asysnail.net" <sd@...asysnail.net>,
        Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>,
        "davejwatson@...com" <davejwatson@...com>
Subject: RE: Using the aesni generic gcm(aes) aead in atomic context

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 9:17 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
> Users of the crypto API shouldn't need to check irq_fpu_usable().
> The crypto API should work regardless of what context you're in.
> 

I agree, I'm just saying that as far as I can tell that's not true
for the aesni generic gcm(aes) aead.
It just assume the FPU is available without checking.