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 07:58:24 +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>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Subject: RE: Using the aesni generic gcm(aes) aead in atomic context

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 9:45 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
> For your intended use case I think async processing should work just fine as it
> does for IPsec.
> 

I haven't dived into the async IPSEC fallback code yet, but it seems complicated.
I'm not sure it make the correct performance/complexity tradeoff.