On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 05:42:42PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > Hi Corentin, > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 12:51:11PM +0000, Corentin Labbe wrote: > > All the 32-bit fields need to be 64-bit. In some cases, UINT32_MAX crypto > > operations can be done in seconds. > > > > Reported-by: Eric Biggers <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <[email protected]> > > --- > > crypto/algapi.c | 10 +-- > > crypto/crypto_user_stat.c | 114 +++++++++++++++----------------- > > include/crypto/acompress.h | 8 +-- > > include/crypto/aead.h | 8 +-- > > include/crypto/akcipher.h | 16 ++--- > > include/crypto/hash.h | 6 +- > > include/crypto/kpp.h | 12 ++-- > > include/crypto/rng.h | 8 +-- > > include/crypto/skcipher.h | 8 +-- > > include/linux/crypto.h | 46 ++++++------- > > include/uapi/linux/cryptouser.h | 38 +++++------ > > 11 files changed, 133 insertions(+), 141 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/crypto/algapi.c b/crypto/algapi.c > > index f5396c88e8cd..42fe316f80ee 100644 > > --- a/crypto/algapi.c > > +++ b/crypto/algapi.c > > @@ -259,13 +259,13 @@ static struct crypto_larval > > *__crypto_register_alg(struct crypto_alg *alg) > > list_add(&larval->alg.cra_list, &crypto_alg_list); > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_CRYPTO_STATS > > - atomic_set(&alg->encrypt_cnt, 0); > > - atomic_set(&alg->decrypt_cnt, 0); > > + atomic64_set(&alg->encrypt_cnt, 0); > > + atomic64_set(&alg->decrypt_cnt, 0); > > atomic64_set(&alg->encrypt_tlen, 0); > > atomic64_set(&alg->decrypt_tlen, 0); > > - atomic_set(&alg->verify_cnt, 0); > > - atomic_set(&alg->cipher_err_cnt, 0); > > - atomic_set(&alg->sign_cnt, 0); > > + atomic64_set(&alg->verify_cnt, 0); > > + atomic64_set(&alg->cipher_err_cnt, 0); > > + atomic64_set(&alg->sign_cnt, 0); > > #endif > > > > out: > > diff --git a/crypto/crypto_user_stat.c b/crypto/crypto_user_stat.c > > index a6fb2e6f618d..352569f378a0 100644 > > --- a/crypto/crypto_user_stat.c > > +++ b/crypto/crypto_user_stat.c > > @@ -35,22 +35,21 @@ static int crypto_report_aead(struct sk_buff *skb, > > struct crypto_alg *alg) > > { > > struct crypto_stat raead; > > u64 v64; > > - u32 v32; > > > > memset(&raead, 0, sizeof(raead)); > > > > strscpy(raead.type, "aead", sizeof(raead.type)); > > > > - v32 = atomic_read(&alg->encrypt_cnt); > > - raead.stat_encrypt_cnt = v32; > > + v64 = atomic64_read(&alg->encrypt_cnt); > > + raead.stat_encrypt_cnt = v64; > > v64 = atomic64_read(&alg->encrypt_tlen); > > raead.stat_encrypt_tlen = v64; > > - v32 = atomic_read(&alg->decrypt_cnt); > > - raead.stat_decrypt_cnt = v32; > > + v64 = atomic64_read(&alg->decrypt_cnt); > > + raead.stat_decrypt_cnt = v64; > > v64 = atomic64_read(&alg->decrypt_tlen); > > raead.stat_decrypt_tlen = v64; > > - v32 = atomic_read(&alg->aead_err_cnt); > > - raead.stat_aead_err_cnt = v32; > > + v64 = atomic64_read(&alg->aead_err_cnt); > > + raead.stat_aead_err_cnt = v64; > > > > return nla_put(skb, CRYPTOCFGA_STAT_AEAD, sizeof(raead), &raead); > > } > > Why not assign the result of atomic64_read() directly? > I don't see the point of the 'v64' variable. >
Yes it will be more compact and easier to read Thanks
