On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 11:00:09PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 08:45:22AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 10:07:48PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > From: Eric Biggers <ebigg...@google.com>
> > >
> > > crypto_stats_get() is a no-op when the kernel is compiled without
> > > CONFIG_CRYPTO_STATS, so pairing it with crypto_alg_put() unconditionally
> > > (as crypto_rng_reset() does) is wrong.
> > >
> >
> > Presumably the intention was that _get() and _put() should always pair.
> > It's really ugly and horrible that they don't. We could have
> > predicted bug like this would happen and will continue to happen until
> > the crypto_stats_get() is renamed.
> >
>
> Well, the crypto stats stuff has always been pretty broken, so I don't think
> people have looked at it too closely. Currently crypto_stats_get() pairs with
> one of the functions that tallies the statistics, such as
> crypto_stats_rng_seed() or crypto_stats_aead_encrypt(). What change are you
> suggesting, exactly? Maybe moving the conditional crypto_alg_put() into a new
> function crypto_stats_put() and moving it into the callers? Or do you think
> the
> functions should just be renamed to something like crypto_stats_begin() and
> crypto_stats_end_{rng_seed,aead_encrypt}()?
To be honest, I misread the crypto_alg_put() thinking that it was
crypto_*stats*_put(). My favourite fix would be to introduce a
crypto_stats_put() which is a mirror of crypto_stats_get() and ifdeffed
out if we don't have CONFIG_CRYPTO_STATS.
regards,
dan carpenter
