All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Jerry Shih <jerry.shih@sifive.com>
Cc: paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com,
	aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
	davem@davemloft.net, andy.chiu@sifive.com,
	greentime.hu@sifive.com, conor.dooley@microchip.com,
	guoren@kernel.org, bjorn@rivosinc.com, heiko@sntech.de,
	ardb@kernel.org, phoebe.chen@sifive.com, hongrong.hsu@sifive.com,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvkg accelerated GCM GHASH implementation
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 17:42:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231122014216.GI2172@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231025183644.8735-8-jerry.shih@sifive.com>

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 02:36:39AM +0800, Jerry Shih wrote:
> +struct riscv64_ghash_context {
> +	be128 key;
> +};
> +
> +struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx {
> +	be128 shash;
> +	u8 buffer[GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE];
> +	u32 bytes;
> +};

I recommend calling the first struct 'riscv64_ghash_tfm_ctx', and making the
pointers to it be named 'tctx'.  That would more clearly distinguish it from the
desc_ctx / dctx.

> +
> +typedef void (*ghash_func)(be128 *Xi, const be128 *H, const u8 *inp,
> +			   size_t len);
> +
> +static inline void ghash_blocks(const struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx,
> +				struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx *dctx,
> +				const u8 *src, size_t srclen, ghash_func func)
> +	if (crypto_simd_usable()) {
> +		kernel_vector_begin();
> +		func(&dctx->shash, &ctx->key, src, srclen);
> +		kernel_vector_end();

The indirection to ghash_func is unnecessary, since the only value is
gcm_ghash_rv64i_zvkg.

This also means that ghash_update() should be folded into ghash_update_zvkg(),
and ghash_final() into ghash_final_zvkg().

> +	} else {
> +		while (srclen >= GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE) {
> +			crypto_xor((u8 *)&dctx->shash, src, GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE);
> +			gf128mul_lle(&dctx->shash, &ctx->key);
> +			srclen -= GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE;
> +			src += GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE;
> +		}
> +	}

The assembly code uses the equivalent of the following do-while loop instead:

        do {
                srclen -= GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE;
        } while (srclen);

I.e., it assumes the length here is nonzero and a multiple of 16, which it is.

To avoid confusion, I recommend making the C code use the same do-while loop.


>        const struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx =
>               crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(desc->tfm));

crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(tfm)) should be crypto_shash_ctx(tfm)

> +static int ghash_final(struct shash_desc *desc, u8 *out, ghash_func func)
> +{
> +	const struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx =
> +		crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(desc->tfm));
> +	struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx *dctx = shash_desc_ctx(desc);
> +	int i;
> +
> +	if (dctx->bytes) {
> +		for (i = dctx->bytes; i < GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE; i++)
> +			dctx->buffer[i] = 0;
> +
> +		ghash_blocks(ctx, dctx, dctx->buffer, GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE, func);
> +		dctx->bytes = 0;
> +	}
> +

Setting dctx->bytes above is unnecessary.

> +static int ghash_init(struct shash_desc *desc)
> +{
> +	struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx *dctx = shash_desc_ctx(desc);
> +
> +	*dctx = (struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx){};
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int ghash_update_zvkg(struct shash_desc *desc, const u8 *src,
> +			     unsigned int srclen)
> +{
> +	return ghash_update(desc, src, srclen, gcm_ghash_rv64i_zvkg);
> +}
> +
> +static int ghash_final_zvkg(struct shash_desc *desc, u8 *out)
> +{
> +	return ghash_final(desc, out, gcm_ghash_rv64i_zvkg);
> +}
> +
> +static int ghash_setkey(struct crypto_shash *tfm, const u8 *key,
> +			unsigned int keylen)
> +{
> +	struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx =
> +		crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(tfm));
> +
> +	if (keylen != GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	memcpy(&ctx->key, key, GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct shash_alg riscv64_ghash_alg_zvkg = {
> +	.digestsize = GHASH_DIGEST_SIZE,
> +	.init = ghash_init,
> +	.update = ghash_update_zvkg,
> +	.final = ghash_final_zvkg,
> +	.setkey = ghash_setkey,

IMO it's helpful to order the shash functions as follows, both in their
definitions and their fields in struct shash_alg:

    setkey
    init
    update
    final

That matches the order in which they're called.

- Eric

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Jerry Shih <jerry.shih@sifive.com>
Cc: paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com,
	aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
	davem@davemloft.net, andy.chiu@sifive.com,
	greentime.hu@sifive.com, conor.dooley@microchip.com,
	guoren@kernel.org, bjorn@rivosinc.com, heiko@sntech.de,
	ardb@kernel.org, phoebe.chen@sifive.com, hongrong.hsu@sifive.com,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvkg accelerated GCM GHASH implementation
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 17:42:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231122014216.GI2172@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231025183644.8735-8-jerry.shih@sifive.com>

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 02:36:39AM +0800, Jerry Shih wrote:
> +struct riscv64_ghash_context {
> +	be128 key;
> +};
> +
> +struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx {
> +	be128 shash;
> +	u8 buffer[GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE];
> +	u32 bytes;
> +};

I recommend calling the first struct 'riscv64_ghash_tfm_ctx', and making the
pointers to it be named 'tctx'.  That would more clearly distinguish it from the
desc_ctx / dctx.

> +
> +typedef void (*ghash_func)(be128 *Xi, const be128 *H, const u8 *inp,
> +			   size_t len);
> +
> +static inline void ghash_blocks(const struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx,
> +				struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx *dctx,
> +				const u8 *src, size_t srclen, ghash_func func)
> +	if (crypto_simd_usable()) {
> +		kernel_vector_begin();
> +		func(&dctx->shash, &ctx->key, src, srclen);
> +		kernel_vector_end();

The indirection to ghash_func is unnecessary, since the only value is
gcm_ghash_rv64i_zvkg.

This also means that ghash_update() should be folded into ghash_update_zvkg(),
and ghash_final() into ghash_final_zvkg().

> +	} else {
> +		while (srclen >= GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE) {
> +			crypto_xor((u8 *)&dctx->shash, src, GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE);
> +			gf128mul_lle(&dctx->shash, &ctx->key);
> +			srclen -= GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE;
> +			src += GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE;
> +		}
> +	}

The assembly code uses the equivalent of the following do-while loop instead:

        do {
                srclen -= GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE;
        } while (srclen);

I.e., it assumes the length here is nonzero and a multiple of 16, which it is.

To avoid confusion, I recommend making the C code use the same do-while loop.


>        const struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx =
>               crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(desc->tfm));

crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(tfm)) should be crypto_shash_ctx(tfm)

> +static int ghash_final(struct shash_desc *desc, u8 *out, ghash_func func)
> +{
> +	const struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx =
> +		crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(desc->tfm));
> +	struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx *dctx = shash_desc_ctx(desc);
> +	int i;
> +
> +	if (dctx->bytes) {
> +		for (i = dctx->bytes; i < GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE; i++)
> +			dctx->buffer[i] = 0;
> +
> +		ghash_blocks(ctx, dctx, dctx->buffer, GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE, func);
> +		dctx->bytes = 0;
> +	}
> +

Setting dctx->bytes above is unnecessary.

> +static int ghash_init(struct shash_desc *desc)
> +{
> +	struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx *dctx = shash_desc_ctx(desc);
> +
> +	*dctx = (struct riscv64_ghash_desc_ctx){};
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int ghash_update_zvkg(struct shash_desc *desc, const u8 *src,
> +			     unsigned int srclen)
> +{
> +	return ghash_update(desc, src, srclen, gcm_ghash_rv64i_zvkg);
> +}
> +
> +static int ghash_final_zvkg(struct shash_desc *desc, u8 *out)
> +{
> +	return ghash_final(desc, out, gcm_ghash_rv64i_zvkg);
> +}
> +
> +static int ghash_setkey(struct crypto_shash *tfm, const u8 *key,
> +			unsigned int keylen)
> +{
> +	struct riscv64_ghash_context *ctx =
> +		crypto_tfm_ctx(crypto_shash_tfm(tfm));
> +
> +	if (keylen != GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	memcpy(&ctx->key, key, GHASH_BLOCK_SIZE);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct shash_alg riscv64_ghash_alg_zvkg = {
> +	.digestsize = GHASH_DIGEST_SIZE,
> +	.init = ghash_init,
> +	.update = ghash_update_zvkg,
> +	.final = ghash_final_zvkg,
> +	.setkey = ghash_setkey,

IMO it's helpful to order the shash functions as follows, both in their
definitions and their fields in struct shash_alg:

    setkey
    init
    update
    final

That matches the order in which they're called.

- Eric

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

  reply	other threads:[~2023-11-22  1:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 100+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-25 18:36 [PATCH 00/12] RISC-V: provide some accelerated cryptography implementations using vector extensions Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 01/12] RISC-V: add helper function to read the vector VLEN Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 02/12] RISC-V: hook new crypto subdir into build-system Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 03/12] RISC-V: crypto: add OpenSSL perl module for vector instructions Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 04/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvkned accelerated AES implementation Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-02  4:51   ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-02  4:51     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-20  2:53     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20  2:53       ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 05/12] crypto: scatterwalk - Add scatterwalk_next() to get the next scatterlist in scatter_walk Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 06/12] RISC-V: crypto: add accelerated AES-CBC/CTR/ECB/XTS implementations Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-02  5:16   ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-02  5:16     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-07  8:53     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-07  8:53       ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-09  7:16       ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-09  7:16         ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-10  3:58         ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-10  3:58           ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-10  4:34           ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-10  4:34             ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-10  4:58         ` Andy Chiu
2023-11-10  4:58           ` Andy Chiu
2023-11-10  5:44           ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-10  5:44             ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-11 11:08             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-11-11 11:08               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-11-11 17:52               ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-11 17:52                 ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-20  2:47     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20  2:47       ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20 19:28       ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-20 19:28         ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-22  1:14     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-22  1:14       ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-27  2:52       ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-27  2:52         ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-09  8:05   ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-09  8:05     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-10  4:06     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-10  4:06       ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20  2:36       ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20  2:36         ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 07/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvkg accelerated GCM GHASH implementation Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-22  1:42   ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2023-11-22  1:42     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-27  2:49     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-27  2:49       ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 08/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvknha/b accelerated SHA224/256 implementations Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 09/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvknhb accelerated SHA384/512 implementations Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-22  1:32   ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-22  1:32     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-27  2:50     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-27  2:50       ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 10/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvksed accelerated SM4 implementation Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-02  5:58   ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-02  5:58     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-20  2:55     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20  2:55       ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 11/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvksh accelerated SM3 implementation Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36 ` [PATCH 12/12] RISC-V: crypto: add Zvkb accelerated ChaCha20 implementation Jerry Shih
2023-10-25 18:36   ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-02  5:43   ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-02  5:43     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-20  2:55     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20  2:55       ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-20 19:18       ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-20 19:18         ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-21 10:55         ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-21 10:55           ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-21 13:14           ` Conor Dooley
2023-11-21 13:14             ` Conor Dooley
2023-11-21 23:37             ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-21 23:37               ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-22  0:39               ` Conor Dooley
2023-11-22  0:39                 ` Conor Dooley
2023-11-22 17:37             ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-22 17:37               ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-22 18:05               ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-11-22 18:05                 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-11-22 18:20               ` Conor Dooley
2023-11-22 18:20                 ` Conor Dooley
2023-11-22 19:05                 ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-22 19:05                   ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-22  1:29   ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-22  1:29     ` Eric Biggers
2023-11-27  2:14     ` Jerry Shih
2023-11-27  2:14       ` Jerry Shih

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20231122014216.GI2172@sol.localdomain \
    --to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=andy.chiu@sifive.com \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=bjorn@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=greentime.hu@sifive.com \
    --cc=guoren@kernel.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=hongrong.hsu@sifive.com \
    --cc=jerry.shih@sifive.com \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=phoebe.chen@sifive.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.