From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 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.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEB24284880; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:09:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772028543; cv=none; b=CgiVf9vhDzI7HvKhkVpAuCADxJBqG2eG45XauZun5HjqhoYZzmsCO0WuP+SlNGOVRdboLj3h3FsdQxhLQLOJwvFiffiirHyGkHD8GH/EaSrbi+XqnttuzMHQXbE5bCpXY1cVytO0hZrCKfZzW5tbMQJ6ub+/MKjN7/Eu5fP+z/g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772028543; c=relaxed/simple; bh=najeskeSGaMowgnuBVZaa8lrbJEgO/ZS8Nq1D58P5LE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=DadvxCggtdxjzAjqZmXaRfhUrm+ZbDHOyMnp0dIH/Ey0HUnQ0siQhvaSC/zSLy43vgpSIlFbPi60DZD0BurVr3SMP2Qs/EVKD2pFCWLJQBd/qLgON5jyDmtbqln4LnwmJPnWwJTd6jbJWEfJmCSAb+4Au5wLnAKqEatuKE1p6iM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=HiRxEFd7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="HiRxEFd7" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=XWRvKSrVzQxumCJr/FJXMqnLK+ok9RFugzOcVZ5aYRY=; b=HiRxEFd7f+eEHFsntm7SMlUNB1 c4AbjTQ3piGQdRYpSHk5q14C/THBE2f4pSP7LePeXBUybbnnTzy6Dby15D3pa0iM5POQ59cNB5cRH fyidvvGLYHpfM+mkOkn8LhcIZHaEC2oIzXwGkV5aFX6h3Y7jD6Q60R8HQh1sSif6y3VSnhUlS3exW LOJdm6i77zrXeiqWO2j2tQ+YDyYd/aNW3LdG0Y1IJ+UTpUbft7YWYoMAWbVhBBZ1AHHr294qm7me3 SqEh2KyPQJkdERVVceI7J7H85do0NBqCWH+BnIEGQloCUCVB9yJCOTPkHmVF3b28lZZkdYD1/gbtY 0xPcmI+Q==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vvFZO-00000004AMD-2PsX; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:08:54 +0000 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 06:08:54 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Eric Biggers Cc: Jay Wang , Herbert Xu , "David S . Miller" , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Jay Wang , Vegard Nossum , Nicolai Stange , Ilia Okomin , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Luis Chamberlain , Petr Pavlu , Nathan Chancellor , Nicolas Schier , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/17] Add standalone crypto kernel module technical documentation Message-ID: References: <20260212024228.6267-1-wanjay@amazon.com> <20260212024228.6267-18-wanjay@amazon.com> <20260225015517.GA162634@quark> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-modules@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260225015517.GA162634@quark> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 05:55:17PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > Let's be clear: this is possible only when the kernel has a stable ABI > to the crypto module, which realistically isn't something that is going > to be supported upstream. The Linux kernel is well-known for not > maintaining a stable in-kernel ABI, for good reasons. > > So, the only case where this feature would have a benefit over the > kernel's existing approach to FIPS 140 is in downstream kernels that > maintain a stable in-kernel ABI. There would be no benefit to direct > users of the mainline kernel or even the stable release series. > > For this to be considered for upstream there would need to be some level > of consensus in the community to support this feature despite this. That's a very nice way to say this goes against all the established principles for kernel development.