From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932229AbcBPUlP (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:41:15 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:32048 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752311AbcBPUlM (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:41:12 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,456,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="48940783" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] crypto: KEYS: convert public key and digsig asym to the akcipher api To: David Howells References: <16626.1455184286@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <56BBC321.1000503@intel.com> <20160202180853.2887.82271.stgit@tstruk-mobl1> <20160202180848.2887.9937.stgit@tstruk-mobl1> <5286.1455113876@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <17832.1455185317@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com From: Tadeusz Struk Message-ID: <56C3886F.3050009@intel.com> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:37:03 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <17832.1455185317@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi David, On 02/11/2016 02:08 AM, David Howells wrote: > David Howells wrote: > >> > Tadeusz Struk wrote: >> > >>>> > > > Why didn't you put the RSA signature parsing - ie. where the OID and the other >>>> > > > bits are checked - into crypto/rsa.c? >>>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > Do you want to get rid of the crypto/asymmetric_keys/rsa.c completely? >>> > > I wanted to make the conversion churn as small as possible. >>> > > I can move it in a subsequent patch if you want. >> > >> > I was thinking of getting rid of it completely, yes. >> > >> > But I was wondering if you had some other motivation, such as keeping the >> > crypto layer purely the mathematical operation. >> > >> > It's an interesting question where to draw the line, actually. The answer may >> > hinge on what things like the TPM do. I should ask the TPM folks. > Looking in the TPM emulator, the TPM_Sign operation indeed puts the wrappings > on, so this needs to go into the crypto layer. David, If you could tell me what repo should I work with then I can prepare subsequent patch to move this to a new file under crypto/ Thanks, -- TS