From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75FC1C369DC for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:43:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=E+daFW9TiG3MY86ROFX8OX7W5wH95uIZXeb14ntCkmg=; b=4CbBdq0+eGxiCvvbhdVMeEIOmT IFOqI6fFVkbRLoq7+clIh7Jc0GM4UvWK1jKHHULYdJ+9BvqnHsM3Rb+1+q9l8Ier81m+JTsMOd1Hv aOyJz9JImkx6DasaooRKr5P2LxwGJwhJ4sU73TwbD9wGO/4PyAtKjQJDY9ySualAQ8P0BHsaf7s5a QowYL2fnhkgq5t4OOG3ZSXjXeyeBOXDCpokGyEAKUcl6pMoVA/yADakMXdFRpEveksfrnPUsoMxdO j3Pl8fAJOufjRlkdyhJwDCpH6RpKu8wPRjTVijdkJMSNZBzRc6QbaqveuEURalYQjLVmOJmvqzA7E 9Kkd1iOQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1u9xPd-0000000BXAV-2GCH; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:43:05 +0000 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org ([2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1u9xLY-0000000BWjs-2v0r; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:38:52 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BA368462; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:38:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05435C4CEE3; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:38:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1745980731; bh=TxucFTFDsaAfXHIM/UmDu7tlSHNslTip/1/i68IYLNo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=rKbKJ7nIpStk8OVO+UghSaA/PHyCumrXyBYGMhec+zz6zGnR725ui8YU/d2He5FZH l3ZysS7wQNq2XykORQq3s6X96GzzDVMLzqg6xRB5oJgw8D/zjnr70FZaqFzpxo/ux6 slCd0ewtZDB+TImi79ATUnbFJj1sgEXGWWW0acjg+O3tQjOUW+BcbpUUPzocAdj7Wk bf3XVBXfA5+WHNpc7JRkd7HigULuV18BqxGLAsXHYHc0FuMwOxf5OyajzjpK9zNSxR ZbplbfUya7mHSj39ujX+ycEmi0q7WWaUSaSesTjTADwli278a+F9qyBiH7pdqlnuWf klgtVgYRokWjQ== Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:38:49 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Herbert Xu Cc: Linux Crypto Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel , "Jason A . Donenfeld " , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH 00/13] Architecture-optimized SHA-256 library API Message-ID: <20250430023849.GA275186@sol.localdomain> References: <20250429165749.GC1743@sol.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 10:27:15AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 09:57:49AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > To be clear, the objections I have on your v2 patchset still hold. Your > > unsolicited changes to my patches add unnecessary complexity and redundancy, > > make the crypto_shash API even harder to use correctly, and also break the build > > for several architectures. If you're going to again use your maintainer > > privileges to push these out anyway over my objections, I'd appreciate it if you > > at least made your dubious changes as incremental patches using your own > > authorship so that they can be properly reviewed/blamed. > > Well the main problem is that your patch introduces a regression > in the shash sha256 code by making its export format differ from > other shash sha256 implementations (e.g., padlock-sha). > > So your first patch cannot stand as is. What I could do is split up > the first patch so that the lib/crypto sha stuff goes in by itself > followed by a separate patch replacing the crypto/sha256 code. > > > Please also note that I've sent a v4 which fixes the one real issue that my v1 > > patchset had: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250428170040.423825-1-ebiggers@kernel.org > > Yes I've seen it but it still has the same issue of changing the > shash sha256 export format. Nothing requires that the export formats be consistent, but also the fact that padlock-sha uses a weird format in the first place is an artificial problem that you introduced just a couple weeks ago. And even if we *must* use the same format as padlock-sha, that can be done by using your crypto_sha256_export_lib and crypto_sha256_import_lib, without all your other changes. - Eric