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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A25EC468BC for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 20:45:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E46A208C3 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 20:45:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="pqSDWULi" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729915AbfFGUpr (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2019 16:45:47 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f66.google.com ([209.85.210.66]:39174 "EHLO mail-ot1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729640AbfFGUpr (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2019 16:45:47 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f66.google.com with SMTP id r21so3083860otq.6; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 13:45:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zKQpC28+fMaUKoMpAL7IKWkXUs1nFaBz+Nb/D2b3P3o=; b=pqSDWULiFsTxWfzL9w8OimC9UdfvQ0PNUb1Ux0bW5bYVFoi3tqqBHCBIdTQG4xloSG Gd600djS7C8797Kao2fgUJJYyN/da7spO1Pb4KSY3+EsZ/3WcM/yyBxGNn9dHy6Wmd7c gDjcoj5YoDbn4Q4wpCAPfiwB99IhQ58l4VXzEAGBnXeA/2uVi2Og7JcfPF5HSFImZF6O h8EZqlitXzZBxL9AvYNhtQgDElcpLMfnz/pkiZvUMShXjw6SMj3kcxymPqkJNlpaGW4r MCPm4/lFkjsekr+tsia9eLFWP07rBDvPZDKk3fwIxidWKOPkkJLA5iB4j2y7yx3IhikH kHmw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=zKQpC28+fMaUKoMpAL7IKWkXUs1nFaBz+Nb/D2b3P3o=; b=by5N0ByVFJZlWP/wnpPbe6Ym3s3ByS8Z13zYVaXqqcikMgWYnelJROXhaYnvphAc2b e1pwmBQq0Tr9jj80yjhNPaMVNQZEEwEMySFoDzhWmeNLhUVBVzHPFToLpxVZXiniEaaz vTI5lkKcbmAZogAgv/OSXBg7NtcjdogxQ20sLgt1sIjfKlL+vAvMcasQAW8I17QCYMxK MsAURUUt8OGknywSiua4A7C398EHPXmepjvqVACYtnHwFCSVjLF1513kUR6I9DRZgokF SopRqrvIyxJ3AeW+nW5he4GCsztEmpWLeiqy8U4tBEn5v4jGe2SG5CViofy75zXLMmR8 hXgg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWnxQYdIi3CgzKWY48jo2YiREq6mmMKRq/bsMHdJ1+FXhtSXVyz AMOty95/PLcTJweG5/t5MHrJl6To X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxqVkHo+7S7GIasg4NEBRa6Ov1AdrlChjsdnFREOZ8hrDudGm/dUU/H21QPN2sWrr1X9SxUwA== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6a92:: with SMTP id l18mr8864877otq.294.1559940346474; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 13:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.249] (cpe-70-114-247-242.austin.res.rr.com. [70.114.247.242]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id x204sm1119197oig.9.2019.06.07.13.45.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 07 Jun 2019 13:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] move WEP implementation to skcipher interface To: Ard Biesheuvel , Marcel Holtmann Cc: Eric Biggers , "open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE" , Herbert Xu , Johannes Berg , "open list:NFC SUBSYSTEM" , "David S. Miller" References: <20190607144944.13485-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <20190607175947.GB648@sol.localdomain> <97BB95F6-4A4C-4984-9EAB-6069E19B4A4F@holtmann.org> From: Denis Kenzior Message-ID: Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 15:45:45 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Hi Ard, > > Ah ok, good to know. That does imply that the driver is not entirely > broken, which is good news I suppose. > Not entirely, but we did have to resort to using multiple sockets, otherwise parallel encrypt/decrypt operations on the socket would result in invalid behavior. Probably due to the issue Eric already pointed out. No such issue with any other ciphers that we use. Regards, -Denis