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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E8AEC43217 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2021 16:08:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 821E06108B for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2021 16:08:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235364AbhJZQKs (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Oct 2021 12:10:48 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:57570 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234225AbhJZQKq (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Oct 2021 12:10:46 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 785186108B; Tue, 26 Oct 2021 16:08:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1635264502; bh=I9GJJIJ1ciVkNplFB72u5b2bVUSDmxGPxemQZuOwPfQ=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=kMbVo3kamYq1rArekSB0qLarlRl5J8pWp326TEGhbWDPRk+JpqeP/0hnb94AMUtD9 8NevxyVmtsgsdfZKzigqTQoiOgMQrQTXuqobBNpUVF1vPULfvgS5Z45wH0UtUeVmel 0FdBL23rXE2Z2WJ8M5SGl1i0zaJmlpBQRZO20/9go6MX47mSvVjr0BgSW8lnHnr7+W pL1qVOxXPA4yJ/kJeZsgvMsW8+UbYeDgU/cWwF/Nj+vLOvnMBbWMxYwWUsUq6hih39 FohZnAbzpakkBUaOcYieESjA4scj+s8sOYZ9YG4u1BHxWEhePXH/aWOSSDW4c4XOMR G0EdeoJwdNi7A== Received: by mail-oi1-f175.google.com with SMTP id o83so21317425oif.4; Tue, 26 Oct 2021 09:08:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532myRnhy41hUaP0BNuWhKhmHGZ/fB24mHNsljoAFSeKoI2v0DUq IY7auFV4A/Fjvl2n6TsHpJ/bUQ6SMrdC28Baej8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyKuzF2435HA4gQPovRQk2F3CCNzD/7cMKyLJZAXO0i4XInSWHhpsWgmvIwbw0BF3MFRGD5FXz1Eu294qSF3yI= X-Received: by 2002:a54:448e:: with SMTP id v14mr3036920oiv.174.1635264501675; Tue, 26 Oct 2021 09:08:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211026075626.61975-1-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> In-Reply-To: <20211026075626.61975-1-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:08:10 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] use SM3 instead of SM3_256 To: Tianjia Zhang Cc: James Bottomley , Jarkko Sakkinen , Mimi Zohar , Jonathan Corbet , Herbert Xu , "David S. Miller" , Peter Huewe , Jason Gunthorpe , David Howells , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Jerry Snitselaar , linux-integrity , keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Linux Doc Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Crypto Mailing List , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 09:56, Tianjia Zhang wrote: > > According to https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-oscca-cfrg-sm3-01.html, > SM3 always produces a 256-bit hash value and there are no plans for > other length development, so there is no ambiguity in the name of sm3. > What is the point of these changes? Having '256' in the identifiers is merely redundant and not factually incorrect, so why can't we just leave these as they are? > --- > v3 changes: > - The fix of document trusted-encrypted.rst is put in patch 2 > > v2 changes: > - an additional macro with the same value is defined for uapi instead > of renaming directly > > Tianjia Zhang (2): > crypto: use SM3 instead of SM3_256 > tpm: use SM3 instead of SM3_256 > > Documentation/security/keys/trusted-encrypted.rst | 2 +- > crypto/hash_info.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c | 2 +- > include/crypto/hash_info.h | 2 +- > include/linux/tpm.h | 2 +- > include/uapi/linux/hash_info.h | 3 ++- > security/keys/trusted-keys/trusted_tpm2.c | 2 +- > 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.19.1.3.ge56e4f7 >