On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 15:45, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> On 9/15/2020 1:26 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 13:02, Horia Geantă wrote:
> >>
> >> On 9/14/2020 9:20 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 20:12, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> On 9/14/2020 7:28
On 9/15/2020 1:26 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 13:02, Horia Geantă wrote:
>>
>> On 9/14/2020 9:20 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 20:12, Horia Geantă wrote:
On 9/14/2020 7:28 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 19:24, Horia
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 13:02, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> On 9/14/2020 9:20 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 20:12, Horia Geantă wrote:
> >>
> >> On 9/14/2020 7:28 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 19:24, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> On 9/9/2020 1:10
On 9/14/2020 9:20 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 20:12, Horia Geantă wrote:
>>
>> On 9/14/2020 7:28 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 19:24, Horia Geantă wrote:
On 9/9/2020 1:10 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 01:35:04PM +0300,
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 20:12, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> On 9/14/2020 7:28 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 19:24, Horia Geantă wrote:
> >>
> >> On 9/9/2020 1:10 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 01:35:04PM +0300, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> > Just go with
On 9/14/2020 7:28 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 19:24, Horia Geantă wrote:
>>
>> On 9/9/2020 1:10 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 01:35:04PM +0300, Horia Geantă wrote:
> Just go with the get_unaligned unconditionally.
Won't this lead to
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 19:24, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> On 9/9/2020 1:10 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 01:35:04PM +0300, Horia Geantă wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just go with the get_unaligned unconditionally.
> >>
> >> Won't this lead to sub-optimal code for ARMv7
> >> in case the IV is
On 9/9/2020 1:10 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 01:35:04PM +0300, Horia Geantă wrote:
>>
>>> Just go with the get_unaligned unconditionally.
>>
>> Won't this lead to sub-optimal code for ARMv7
>> in case the IV is aligned?
>
> If this should be optimised in ARMv7 then that should
On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 01:35:04PM +0300, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> > Just go with the get_unaligned unconditionally.
>
> Won't this lead to sub-optimal code for ARMv7
> in case the IV is aligned?
If this should be optimised in ARMv7 then that should be done
in get_unaligned itself and not
On 8/21/2020 6:47 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 07:35:43PM +0300, Andrei Botila wrote:
>>
>> +static bool xts_skcipher_ivsize(struct skcipher_request *req)
>> +{
>> +struct crypto_skcipher *skcipher = crypto_skcipher_reqtfm(req);
>> +unsigned int ivsize =
On 8/21/2020 6:47 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 05:30:41PM +0300, Horia Geantă wrote:
>>
>>> + if (IS_ERR(fallback)) {
>>> + pr_err("Failed to allocate %s fallback: %ld\n",
>>> + tfm_name, PTR_ERR(fallback));
>>> +
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 05:30:41PM +0300, Horia Geantă wrote:
>
> > + if (IS_ERR(fallback)) {
> > + pr_err("Failed to allocate %s fallback: %ld\n",
> > + tfm_name, PTR_ERR(fallback));
> > + return PTR_ERR(fallback);
> Shouldn't
On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 07:35:43PM +0300, Andrei Botila wrote:
>
> +static bool xts_skcipher_ivsize(struct skcipher_request *req)
> +{
> + struct crypto_skcipher *skcipher = crypto_skcipher_reqtfm(req);
> + unsigned int ivsize = crypto_skcipher_ivsize(skcipher);
> + u64 size = 0;
> +
>
Hi
[This is an automated email]
This commit has been processed because it contains a "Fixes:" tag
fixing commit: c6415a6016bf ("crypto: caam - add support for acipher xts(aes)").
The bot has tested the following trees: v5.8.1, v5.7.15, v5.4.58, v4.19.139,
v4.14.193, v4.9.232, v4.4.232.
On 8/6/2020 7:36 PM, Andrei Botila (OSS) wrote:
> @@ -3344,12 +3382,30 @@ static int caam_cra_init(struct crypto_skcipher *tfm)
> struct caam_skcipher_alg *caam_alg =
> container_of(alg, typeof(*caam_alg), skcipher);
> struct caam_ctx *ctx = crypto_skcipher_ctx(tfm);
> +
From: Andrei Botila
A hardware limitation exists for CAAM until Era 9 which restricts
the accelerator to IVs with only 8 bytes. When CAAM has a lower era
a fallback is necessary to process 16 bytes IV.
Fixes: c6415a6016bf ("crypto: caam - add support for acipher xts(aes)")
Cc: # v4.4+
16 matches
Mail list logo
