On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> On 19 July 2018 at 12:13, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>>> On 19 Jul 2018, at 12:09, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
>>> wrote:
I have only build tested it, so if you make sure that it does not
On 19 July 2018 at 12:13, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
>> On 19 Jul 2018, at 12:09, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
>> wrote:
>>> I have only build tested it, so if you make sure that it does not break
>>> anything, please go ahead.
>>
>> I can give it a spin;
> On 19 Jul 2018, at 12:09, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
> wrote:
>> I have only build tested it, so if you make sure that it does not break
>> anything, please go ahead.
>
> I can give it a spin; what's the best way? Is CONFIG_CRYPTO_MANAGER=y
>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> I have only build tested it, so if you make sure that it does not break
> anything, please go ahead.
I can give it a spin; what's the best way? Is CONFIG_CRYPTO_MANAGER=y
sufficient?
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
--
dm-devel
> On 19 Jul 2018, at 11:51, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Ard Biesheuvel
> wrote:
>> On 18 July 2018 at 23:50, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On 18 July 2018 at 05:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> After my
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> On 18 July 2018 at 23:50, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 18 July 2018 at 05:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
After my ahash to shash conversions, only ccm is left as an ahash
On 19 July 2018 at 00:33, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
> wrote:
>> On 18 July 2018 at 23:50, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On 18 July 2018 at 05:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> After my ahash to
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> On 18 July 2018 at 23:50, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 18 July 2018 at 05:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
After my ahash to shash conversions, only ccm is left as an ahash
On 18 July 2018 at 23:50, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 18 July 2018 at 05:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> After my ahash to shash conversions, only ccm is left as an ahash
>>> user, since it actually uses sg. But with the hard-coded value
On 18 July 2018 at 05:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> After my ahash to shash conversions, only ccm is left as an ahash
>> user, since it actually uses sg. But with the hard-coded value reduced
>> to 376, this doesn't trip the frame warnings any
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> After my ahash to shash conversions, only ccm is left as an ahash
> user, since it actually uses sg. But with the hard-coded value reduced
> to 376, this doesn't trip the frame warnings any more. :)
>
> I'll send an updated series soon.
Maybe
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 5:39 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Herbert Xu
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 07:59:09PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Herbert Xu
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 08:07:10PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 07:59:09PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Herbert Xu
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 08:07:10PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On a plane today I started converting all these to
On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 07:59:09PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Herbert Xu
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 08:07:10PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>
> >> On a plane today I started converting all these to shash. IIUC, it
> >> just looks like this (apologies for
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 3:14 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:20 PM, Herbert Xu
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:17:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
What is the correct value to use for AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK?
On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 08:07:10PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On a plane today I started converting all these to shash. IIUC, it
>> just looks like this (apologies for whitespace damage):
>
> Yes if it doesn't actually make use of SGs then
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 08:07:10PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On a plane today I started converting all these to shash. IIUC, it
> just looks like this (apologies for whitespace damage):
Yes if it doesn't actually make use of SGs then shash would be
the way to go. However, for SG users ahash is
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:22 PM, Herbert Xu
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:16:28PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> Is this correct? It seems like you did the bulk of
>> AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK conversions in 2016. Can shash grow an sg
>> interface?
>
> shash does not need to grow an sg
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:20 PM, Herbert Xu
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:17:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> What is the correct value to use for AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK?
>>
>> As I said to arrive at a fixed value you should examine
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:16:28PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> Is this correct? It seems like you did the bulk of
> AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK conversions in 2016. Can shash grow an sg
> interface?
shash does not need to grow an sg interface. All users of
AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK set the
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 06:02:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> Looking through some of the drivers, I found this interesting one:
>
> As I said before these patches are fundamentally broken. Users
> of AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK can only use
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:20 PM, Herbert Xu
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:17:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> Then why does the instrumented tcrypt output show the huge size? Is
>> tcrypt doing something incorrectly?
>
> tcrypt doesn't even use AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK so I don't
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:17:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> Then why does the instrumented tcrypt output show the huge size? Is
> tcrypt doing something incorrectly?
tcrypt doesn't even use AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK so I don't understand
your point.
> What is the correct value to use for
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:44 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 08:33:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Herbert Xu
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 06:02:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Looking through some of the drivers, I found
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 08:33:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Herbert Xu
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 06:02:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>
> >> Looking through some of the drivers, I found this interesting one:
> >
> > As I said before these patches
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 06:02:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> Looking through some of the drivers, I found this interesting one:
>
> As I said before these patches are fundamentally broken. Users
> of AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK can only use
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 06:02:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> Looking through some of the drivers, I found this interesting one:
As I said before these patches are fundamentally broken. Users
of AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK can only use sync algorithm providers
and therefore drivers are
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:17 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> Several uses of AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK() will trigger FRAME_WARN warnings
>>> (when less than 2048) once the VLA is no longer
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Several uses of AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK() will trigger FRAME_WARN warnings
>> (when less than 2048) once the VLA is no longer hidden from the check:
>>
>>
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> Several uses of AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK() will trigger FRAME_WARN warnings
> (when less than 2048) once the VLA is no longer hidden from the check:
>
> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_worker.c:325:1: warning: the frame size of 1112 bytes
> is larger
Several uses of AHASH_REQUEST_ON_STACK() will trigger FRAME_WARN warnings
(when less than 2048) once the VLA is no longer hidden from the check:
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_worker.c:325:1: warning: the frame size of 1112 bytes
is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
31 matches
Mail list logo
