From: "Diederik de Haas" <didi.debian@cknow.org>
To: "Eric Biggers" <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
"Herbert Xu" <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Ingo Franzki" <ifranzki@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: testmgr - reinstate kconfig support for fast tests only
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 21:47:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DAJYOYMK9UJD.LB0N2L64FFA@cknow.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250611190458.GA4097002@google.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2138 bytes --]
On Wed Jun 11, 2025 at 9:04 PM CEST, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 08:53:17PM +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
>> I was about to respond to your reply, but I guess this may be a better
>> fit for it. The TL;DR: version is this:
>>
>> If you think distros shouldn't enable it, as you initially clearly
>> described and it seems to me you still think so, the right thing for
>> distros to do, is to disable those test. Which in turn means the fast
>> tests should not be reinstated (?).
>
> I mean, not enabling the tests in production is how it should be.
>
> But Fedora already enabled CRYPTO_SELFTESTS, apparently because of FIPS
> (https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/3886).
That is recent and there's at least 1 person I recognize as having
proper expertise in this matter ;-)
> You're right there doesn't seem to be an up-to-date bug for Debian
> (https://bugs.debian.org/599441 is old), so maybe my conclusion is premature.
>
> However, besides FIPS I think the problem is that the crypto/ philosophy is to
Another problem (IMO) is that a lot (?) of people (like myself) don't
(really) understand crypto and therefor rely on the description in the
Kconfig help text and make a choice based on that.
That's (one of) the reason(s) I was so happy with the clear text :-)
> throw untested and broken hardware drivers over the wall at users. As long as
Only speaking for myself, my *assumption* is that crypto functionality
in hardware is/should be faster and would lessen the load on the CPU
(which with several SBCs seems really worthwhile).
But I don't have the knowledge to determine whether it's broken or not.
Unless there's a(n easy) tool for that (like 'rngtest' [1]).
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/6425788.NZdkxuyfQg@bagend/
resulting in f.e.
5afdb98dcc55 ("arm64: dts: rockchip: Describe why is HWRNG disabled in RK356x base dtsi")
> that's the case, the self-tests do actually have some value in protecting users
> from those drivers, even though that's not how it should be.
Thanks for the additional info :-)
Diederik
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-11 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-11 17:55 [PATCH] crypto: testmgr - reinstate kconfig support for fast tests only Eric Biggers
2025-06-11 18:53 ` Diederik de Haas
2025-06-11 19:04 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-11 19:47 ` Diederik de Haas [this message]
2025-06-11 20:14 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-12 5:55 ` Herbert Xu
2025-06-12 6:09 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-12 9:03 ` Herbert Xu
2025-06-12 17:20 ` Eric Biggers
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=DAJYOYMK9UJD.LB0N2L64FFA@cknow.org \
--to=didi.debian@cknow.org \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=ifranzki@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox