netdev - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the crypto tree

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: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 21:51:57 -0700
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Crypto List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
	Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>,
	Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@...sta.com>,
	Salam Noureddine <noureddine@...sta.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the crypto tree

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 03:02:43PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 13:23:53 +0800 Herbert Xu wrote:
> > If we simply apply this patch to the netdev tree then everything
> > should work at the next merge window.  But perhaps you could change
> > the patch description to say something like remove the obsolete
> > crypto_hash_alignmask.  It's not important though.
> 
> I'm happy to massage the commit message and apply the fix to net.
> But is it actually 100% correct to do that? IOW is calling
> crypto_ahash_alignmask() already not necessary in net-next or does
> it only become unnecessary after some prep work in crypto-next?
> 
> We can tell Linus to squash this fix into the merge of either
> crypto-next or net-next, I'm pretty sure he'd be okay with that..

It's safe to fold the patch into net-next.  It actually looks like a bug to be
using the alignmask in the way that net/ipv4/tcp_ao.c is using it.  You don't
want to be erroring out just because the algorithm declared an alignmask.

- Eric