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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88279C433FE for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 19:40:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229988AbiJQTkS (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 15:40:18 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55234 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230076AbiJQTkR (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 15:40:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x429.google.com (mail-pf1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::429]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3C346AEAE for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x429.google.com with SMTP id i3so12018587pfk.9 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:40:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=E40amjbnNYxi3bHXc6L0DGbJMK1J+X/tuw892jtBoNU=; b=HioGEo0tu/fTff5p7+5URNAqsTkxuMUcprVmRw/RLbDP+9Ri1kpdI3gsf1OIic19gm xGAVgJUoBW3KWNpp6oXrIR88dslb5v5TP/lP9ayZ1ZD9mOilpohAAD5qLMSqfpEu/gRr 2MNTC75SbLXwE0eIPwW2MqRqpQVROdq8dz3As= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=E40amjbnNYxi3bHXc6L0DGbJMK1J+X/tuw892jtBoNU=; b=gfxWYv3uxs3d2Lrdn0vrRorQdyWZ9b0BdQ2rKdmnol9SEgIAbPlUz+jQI+Q/oU11FC KUpay3RxY4zR6EYs7WyZ8l7fhDZtc3TwHdSDxzRjr0Y6Ba3kNeRahDxVI0VcDAE1WlPx BIWwHU22PscHUue0vtvsuTWq96HlwQ73s+w8b6M5YqEO5ZE+T/NvfemiYkQ1VJHoUemH WXqM/oN/eA5t3BDQlWIg+idaVCc452ZcB+b+yadmN8pPkQTU2+IJk/Jxa7kU/Wcp5uYA NHZvBtCwvsy9eOa5nY5X5YSV0HgQae9hufRF/Y/CTowCfw9c9aUOt0o0O+vs/Fg4BcCJ 6h4A== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2LYy93xqFW3N893emma4Osnsdps3PRcGlMoS6DhzfQcFSdIszh dExR9nTEwdc0TtPGpWdPvoJKeYWnnZZJNg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7bnvMYy8lgjWKpP3JrejST49cSKxLgtUin0NtvpiI8/Xeqliqk/xu678J8YtDL/Yej1GUBAQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:91:0:b0:461:f509:2a31 with SMTP id 139-20020a630091000000b00461f5092a31mr11831239pga.108.1666035615423; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x14-20020aa7940e000000b0056389e00a83sm7479253pfo.63.2022.10.17.12.40.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:40:13 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" , Anton Vorontsov , Colin Cross , Tony Luck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pstore: migrate to crypto acomp interface (take 2) Message-ID: <202210171237.DF5D4A3FD7@keescook> References: <20221006234138.1835739-1-keescook@chromium.org> <191ec24d-35d4-e4e5-85f7-d7301984e647@igalia.com> <202210171100.5BAC4A5CC8@keescook> <202210171227.35ED875219@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 09:33:06PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 at 21:29, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 08:14:14PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > So once we use the same size for input and output, I was curious > > > whether we could encrypt in place, and get rid of the big_oops_buf. > > > And the answer is 'yes', precisely because we have this horrid per-CPU > > > allocation which serves as a bounce buffer. And this is not specific > > > to acomp, the old comp algorithms get wrapped in scomps which receive > > > the same treatment. > > > > Ah, in the sense that "in place" is actually happening in the per-cpu > > allocation, and only if it succeeds does the input buffer get > > overwritten? > > Something like that IIRC. > > > > So at that point, I wondered what the point is of all this complexity. > > > Do we really need 6 different algorithms to compress a couple of K of > > > ASCII text on a code path that is ice cold by definition? Wouldn't it > > > be better to drop the crypto API altogether here, and just use GZIP > > > via the library interface? > > > > Well, my goal was to make the algo "pstore doesn't care". If someone > > picks deflate, do they still get all the per-cpu allocations? > > > > Not if you use the library interface directly. > > The issue with the percpu buffers is that they are only kept if any > scomp TFMs are active, but this is always the case for pstore, as you > don't want to allocate it on the panic path. Okay, so strictly speaking, eliminating the per-CPU allocation is an improvement. Keeping scomp and doing in-place compression will let pstore use "any" compressions method. Is there a crypto API that does _not_ preallocate the per-CPU stuff? Because, as you say, it's a huge amount of memory on the bigger systems... -- Kees Cook