netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] zinc: Introduce minimal cryptography library

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:   Thu, 9 Aug 2018 11:08:25 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@...il.com>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Samuel Neves <sneves@....uc.pt>,
        "Daniel J . Bernstein" <djb@...yp.to>,
        Tanja Lange <tanja@...erelliptic.org>,
        Jean-Philippe Aumasson <jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com>,
        Karthikeyan Bhargavan <karthik.bhargavan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] zinc: Introduce minimal cryptography library

On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:51 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:49 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>> I really wish we had a way to see that we use asm-generic’s copy of a header in all cases except where an arch opts out.
>
> It's really not that hard to do -- symlink asm-generic to a target
> called "asm" inside an otherwise empty directory, and add that
> otherwise empty directory to the -I paths just after arch/include.
> Since it's searched second, it's only used if the first fails. Maybe
> I'm missing something though, as this seems a bit too obvious. Perhaps
> a project for another day.

The problem here (I think) is that it's preferable for stray files in
the kernel tree to have no effect and, with this scheme, stray files
in arch/*/include/asm could affect the build.  So something explicit
has an advantage.  I just think there should be way to say "this
asm-generic file should affect all arches unless they generic-n or
override-generic-y it or whatever".