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 picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (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 916BDC433EF for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 11:55:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89F8A3C908E for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 12:55:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (in-6.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49A1A3C21C8 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 12:54:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) (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 in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54F74140004E for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 12:54:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AB022113D; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 11:54:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1641297288; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=MqMMWDhGB1GkGGIvhdFPFBCcXoFiapVEYfpaxD1M9jc=; b=E1yK0/g3GII809SxE+6H8fl2vVObg0pmT0mC60VOh6tRdRDiRcc6eOcWmjQwgN0ikyZoqf KVHdD/D0wAOLGBi7usW2Klt7JUlw8FhVrwTRtpoOLR+m+SzSPHtdAWFes75WgpbDV7mV/v jr3H02M24lAU3altnKJ1bp8sQlX7A28= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1641297288; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=MqMMWDhGB1GkGGIvhdFPFBCcXoFiapVEYfpaxD1M9jc=; b=TyKFJzvaDVf+M1JIQfkExOBZtGttBSGY0kbP+EV7TrC0IjGeaCttddoAUlKJVpsy92G3uo mIBqDWVshwg+sADA== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2089D13AF4; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 11:54:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id QSn3BYg11GFVRgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 04 Jan 2022 11:54:48 +0000 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 12:54:46 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: ltp@lists.linux.it Message-ID: References: <20211220212756.13510-1-pvorel@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211220212756.13510-1-pvorel@suse.cz> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-6.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/1] tst_af_alg: Another fix for disabled weak cipher X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: Herbert Xu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi all, [Cc Herbert and Eric ] FYI Herbert's view for using ELIBBAD instead of ENOENT (reply to Eric's question whether using ELIBBAD in kernel is a good approach or bug) [1]: "For the purpose of identifying FIPS-disabled algorithm (as opposed to an algorithm that's not enabled in the kernel at all), I think it is perfectly safe to use ELIBBAD instead of ENOENT in user-space." I suppose that's justify my proposed changes (i.e. testing also ELIBBAD when fips enabled). @Herbert if you care, you can post your Acked-by: tag. Kind regards, Petr [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/YclURQzYKqCMHWx6@gondor.apana.org.au/ -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp