| Message ID | 20220716062920.210381-1-ebiggers@kernel.org |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | crypto: lib - create utils module | expand |
Hi Eric, On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:29:20PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> > > Move the definition of crypto_simd_disabled_for_test into > lib/crypto/utils.c so that it can be accessed by library code. > > This is needed when code that is shared between a traditional crypto API > implementation and a library implementation is built-in, but > CRYPTO_ALGAPI=m. The x86 blake2s previously was an example of this > (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220517033630.1182-1-gaochao49@huawei.com/T/#u). > Although that case was resolved by removing the blake2s shash support, > this problem could easily come back in the future, so let's address it. I'm not sure I see the reason in general for a utility library rather than doing these piecemeal like the rest of lib functions. Why is crypto special here? But in particular to this patch: nothing is actually using crypto_simd_disabled_for_test in lib/crypto, right? So is this necessary? Jason
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 08:32:55PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:29:20PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> > > > > Move the definition of crypto_simd_disabled_for_test into > > lib/crypto/utils.c so that it can be accessed by library code. > > > > This is needed when code that is shared between a traditional crypto API > > implementation and a library implementation is built-in, but > > CRYPTO_ALGAPI=m. The x86 blake2s previously was an example of this > > (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220517033630.1182-1-gaochao49@huawei.com/T/#u). > > Although that case was resolved by removing the blake2s shash support, > > this problem could easily come back in the future, so let's address it. > > I'm not sure I see the reason in general for a utility library rather > than doing these piecemeal like the rest of lib functions. Why is crypto > special here? But in particular to this patch: nothing is actually using > crypto_simd_disabled_for_test in lib/crypto, right? So is this > necessary? Well, this is what Herbert wanted: https://lore.kernel.org/r/YtEgzHuuMts0YBCz@gondor.apana.org.au. It's subjective, but for now I think I prefer this approach too, since the utility functions are so small and are widely used. A whole module is overkill for just a few lines of code. The commit message answers your second and third questions. - Eric
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 09:34:23PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 08:32:55PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:29:20PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> > > > > > > Move the definition of crypto_simd_disabled_for_test into > > > lib/crypto/utils.c so that it can be accessed by library code. > > > > > > This is needed when code that is shared between a traditional crypto API > > > implementation and a library implementation is built-in, but > > > CRYPTO_ALGAPI=m. The x86 blake2s previously was an example of this > > > (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220517033630.1182-1-gaochao49@huawei.com/T/#u). > > > Although that case was resolved by removing the blake2s shash support, > > > this problem could easily come back in the future, so let's address it. > > > > I'm not sure I see the reason in general for a utility library rather > > than doing these piecemeal like the rest of lib functions. Why is crypto > > special here? But in particular to this patch: nothing is actually using > > crypto_simd_disabled_for_test in lib/crypto, right? So is this > > necessary? > > Well, this is what Herbert wanted: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/YtEgzHuuMts0YBCz@gondor.apana.org.au. It's > subjective, but for now I think I prefer this approach too, since the utility > functions are so small and are widely used. A whole module is overkill for just > a few lines of code. > > The commit message answers your second and third questions. > Herbert, any thoughts on this? Note: I forgot to put a MODULE_LICENSE in the new module, so I'll need to resend this patchset even if there are no other issues. - Eric
Hi Eric: On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 12:01:47AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > Herbert, any thoughts on this? I'm happy to drop the simd patch for now as there are no users under lib/crypto. > Note: I forgot to put a MODULE_LICENSE in the new module, so I'll need to resend > this patchset even if there are no other issues. Thanks!
Create a utils module in lib/crypto/, and move __crypto_memneq, __crypto_xor, and crypto_simd_disabled_for_test into it. This supersedes "crypto: xor - move __crypto_xor into lib/" (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220709215453.262237-1-ebiggers@kernel.org/T/#u). Eric Biggers (3): crypto: lib - create utils module and move __crypto_memneq into it crypto: lib - move __crypto_xor into utils crypto: lib - move crypto_simd_disabled_for_test into utils crypto/Kconfig | 2 +- crypto/algapi.c | 77 --------------------------------- lib/Kconfig | 3 -- lib/Makefile | 1 - lib/crypto/Kconfig | 8 ++-- lib/crypto/Makefile | 3 ++ lib/{ => crypto}/memneq.c | 0 lib/crypto/utils.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 8 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-) rename lib/{ => crypto}/memneq.c (100%) create mode 100644 lib/crypto/utils.c base-commit: ec8f7f4821d5e70d71601519bc2325b311324a96