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 lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1811C3ABA5 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:38:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ZnLwf1GYtz3bV6; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:38:58 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=172.105.4.254 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1745980738; cv=none; b=gv5M/6LdZ3XcieyR3S/GTYUHearSjyRhZFV3KaJd5YXRbQ1eC7IZK92BxHU4psA+91ailFcPC3yXHF+Kg0xWqehfwxnRWyh5XCGFLw9uf6catQhxwmDPP/Ldul/ELvgevgAEqvqBPFWwQhuFJ3EKrAUQjnn8uW/cDoTxVph+MHJE+lmzMzqCmL7doVP9Mvyhef6nkrlvrAQ/isGft9Eqc5+NVLBA36SDmbeqbsPid4SXYHkQ1oQKT+doEPfZsAe5Hcj1Y1ulvOi0ZOGpxq+dAEjn62Uf7BQTmd0mW+O+7LiUqqn6ET+y7OoG8Gjk8n6Pb71+zosM4awwmka2hvIrqA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1745980738; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=E+daFW9TiG3MY86ROFX8OX7W5wH95uIZXeb14ntCkmg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=dKwjLLJRZvdsGnxOdPIdr4IqMYPx6J1I3p6Hq8AOETfVG3h+UBCyUKcjqFx4U5dNE8Osl7co638Ya8n2MwuXQzqZEob4nPuBa6TKnZo8fgwbTv+M5BPn9/mQf7rp2lIT3nFbd8R08vWkWqesXMgMhuSrkLOCa9npeedkFquTDlr1JoJZ6pN7kvH8cfCYffCI9wv3S2Wjj0UVyLvNTD3j0LpgrrOlpm5mjihrehMhONzCpio+T/qFvEW9qj5Bcq5JDRMSf8yUV2vGGSmTLTAQsAc/s7M6KTveZFDtukufWDq3r7ll9ewzKDBasLTNi/hQ8sWmrQ/G9MjlunN+34wcVQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=rKbKJ7nI; dkim-atps=neutral; spf=pass (client-ip=172.105.4.254; helo=tor.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=ebiggers@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=rKbKJ7nI; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=172.105.4.254; helo=tor.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=ebiggers@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [172.105.4.254]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ZnLwc5DHtz3bTf for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:38:56 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BA368462; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:38:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05435C4CEE3; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 02:38:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1745980731; bh=TxucFTFDsaAfXHIM/UmDu7tlSHNslTip/1/i68IYLNo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=rKbKJ7nIpStk8OVO+UghSaA/PHyCumrXyBYGMhec+zz6zGnR725ui8YU/d2He5FZH l3ZysS7wQNq2XykORQq3s6X96GzzDVMLzqg6xRB5oJgw8D/zjnr70FZaqFzpxo/ux6 slCd0ewtZDB+TImi79ATUnbFJj1sgEXGWWW0acjg+O3tQjOUW+BcbpUUPzocAdj7Wk bf3XVBXfA5+WHNpc7JRkd7HigULuV18BqxGLAsXHYHc0FuMwOxf5OyajzjpK9zNSxR ZbplbfUya7mHSj39ujX+ycEmi0q7WWaUSaSesTjTADwli278a+F9qyBiH7pdqlnuWf klgtVgYRokWjQ== Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:38:49 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Herbert Xu Cc: Linux Crypto Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel , "Jason A . Donenfeld " , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH 00/13] Architecture-optimized SHA-256 library API Message-ID: <20250430023849.GA275186@sol.localdomain> References: <20250429165749.GC1743@sol.localdomain> X-Mailing-List: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Archive: , List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 10:27:15AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 09:57:49AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > To be clear, the objections I have on your v2 patchset still hold. Your > > unsolicited changes to my patches add unnecessary complexity and redundancy, > > make the crypto_shash API even harder to use correctly, and also break the build > > for several architectures. If you're going to again use your maintainer > > privileges to push these out anyway over my objections, I'd appreciate it if you > > at least made your dubious changes as incremental patches using your own > > authorship so that they can be properly reviewed/blamed. > > Well the main problem is that your patch introduces a regression > in the shash sha256 code by making its export format differ from > other shash sha256 implementations (e.g., padlock-sha). > > So your first patch cannot stand as is. What I could do is split up > the first patch so that the lib/crypto sha stuff goes in by itself > followed by a separate patch replacing the crypto/sha256 code. > > > Please also note that I've sent a v4 which fixes the one real issue that my v1 > > patchset had: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250428170040.423825-1-ebiggers@kernel.org > > Yes I've seen it but it still has the same issue of changing the > shash sha256 export format. Nothing requires that the export formats be consistent, but also the fact that padlock-sha uses a weird format in the first place is an artificial problem that you introduced just a couple weeks ago. And even if we *must* use the same format as padlock-sha, that can be done by using your crypto_sha256_export_lib and crypto_sha256_import_lib, without all your other changes. - Eric