On 11/12/22 06:59, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 23:29, Ben Greear wrote: >> >> On 11/9/22 2:05 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 04:52, Herbert Xu wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 10:50:48AM -0800, Ben Greear wrote: >>>>> >>>>> While rebasing my patches onto 6.1-rc4, I noticed my aesni for ccm(aes) patch didn't apply cleanly, >>>>> and I found this patch described below is applied now. Does this upstream patch mean that aesni is already >>>>> supported upstream now? Or is it specific to whatever xctr is? If so, >>>>> any chance the patch is wanted upstream now? >>>> >>>> AFAICS the xctr patch has nothing to do with what you were trying >>>> to achieve with wireless. My objection still stands with regards >>>> to wireless, we should patch wireless to use the async crypto >>>> interface and not hack around it in the Crypto API. >>>> >>> >>> Indeed. Those are just add/add conflicts because both patches >>> introduce new code into the same set of files. The resolution is >>> generally to keep both sides. >>> >>> As for Herbert's objection: I will note here that in the meantime, >>> arm64 now has gotten rid of the scalar fallbacks entirely in AEAD and >>> skipcher implementations, because those are only callable in task or >>> softirq context, and the arm64 SIMD wrappers now disable softirq >>> processing. This means that the condition that results in the fallback >>> being needed can no longer occur, making the SIMD helper dead code on >>> arm64. >>> >>> I suppose we might do the same thing on x86, but since the kernel mode >>> SIMD handling is highly arch specific, you'd really need to raise this >>> with the x86 maintainers. >>> >> >> Hello Ard, >> >> Could you please review the attached patch to make sure I merged it properly? My concern >> is the cleanup section and/or some problems I might have introduced related to the similarly >> named code that was added upstream. >> > > I don't think the logic is quite right, although it rarely matter. > > I've pushed my version here - it invokes the static call for CTR so it > will use the faster AVX version if the CPU supports it. > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ardb/linux.git/log/?h=aesni-ccm-v6.1 Hello Ard, It looks like something changed again in the intel-aesni logic for 6.6 kernel. I was able to do a small change to the patch to get it to compile, but the kernel crashes when I bring up a wlan port in 6.6. When I remove the aesni patch, the station comes up without crashing. The aesni patch worked fine in 6.5 as far as I can tell. I'm attaching my slightly modified version of the patch you sent previous. If you have time to investigate this it would be much appreciated. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com