Re: [PATCH v3 11/15] crypto: x86/aes-kl - Support AES algorithm using Key Locker instructions

Bae, Chang Seok
2021-11-30T06:57:30Z

On Nov 29, 2021, at 19:48, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 12:06:56PM -0800, Chang S. Bae wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/crypto/Makefile b/arch/x86/crypto/Makefile
>> index ef6c0b9f69c6..f696b037faa5 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/crypto/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/x86/crypto/Makefile
>> @@ -50,6 +50,9 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_NI_INTEL) += aesni-intel.o
>> aesni-intel-y := aesni-intel_asm.o aesni-intel_glue.o aes-intel_glue.o
>> aesni-intel-$(CONFIG_64BIT) += aesni-intel_avx-x86_64.o aes_ctrby8_avx-x86_64.o
>>
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_KL) += aeskl-intel.o
>> +aeskl-intel-y := aeskl-intel_asm.o aesni-intel_asm.o aeskl-intel_glue.o aes-intel_glue.o
>
> This makes the object files aesni-intel_asm.o and aes-intel_glue.o each be built
> into two separate kernel modules. My understanding is that duplicating code
> like that is generally frowned upon. These files should either be built into a
> separate module, which both aesni-intel.ko and aeskl-intel.ko would depend on,
> or aeskl-intel.ko should depend on aesni-intel.ko.

The only reason to include the AES-NI object here is that AES-KL does not
support the 192-bit key.

Maybe the fallback can be the aes-generic driver [1] instead of AES-NI here.

>> diff --git a/arch/x86/crypto/aeskl-intel_asm.S b/arch/x86/crypto/aeskl-intel_asm.S
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..d56ec8dd6644
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/x86/crypto/aeskl-intel_asm.S
>
> This file gets very long after all the modes are added (> 1100 lines). Is there
> really no feasible way to share code between this and aesni-intel_asm.S, similar
> to how the arm64 AES implementations work? Surely most of the logic is the
> same, and it's just the actual AES instructions that differ?

No, these two instruction sets are separate. So I think no room to share the
ASM code.

>> +config CRYPTO_AES_KL
>> + tristate "AES cipher algorithms (AES-KL)"
>> + depends on (LD_VERSION >= 23600) || (LLD_VERSION >= 120000)
>> + depends on DM_CRYPT
>
> 'depends on DM_CRYPT' doesn't really make sense here, since there is no actual
> dependency on dm-crypt in the code.

I think the intention here is to build a policy that the library is available
only when there is a clear use case.

But maybe putting such restriction is too much here.

Thanks
Chang

[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/crypto/aes_generic.c