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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56522C4338F for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 14:11:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C584A60EE8 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 14:11:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org C584A60EE8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:60648 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mBHcN-0002pp-Gt for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:11:35 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56714) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mBHbY-0001zn-WC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:10:45 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:20101) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mBHbV-0008B5-70 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:10:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1628086239; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KnJ1Iqrhhg2dQ8YItw9ZfMyMAiMZStfFOOiLa6wOK3Q=; b=QJiPRDIgXgG8R+S79NhkSl8/Q9Tgrzm2IT5sgBImDNFkMj9jGi2oub57ix9KZEjvKyZ6kT fjygiNFo+y+Qx1Jq8ACfGH/B6Rm60xb97AVc2qAIZBoUfsFSxDPcaPz3soyR84+CPBbYOL NuMoJQ4K4UfsOwvDjfoyEi5qMLMH4DQ= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-346-wpm3-OPRP2abzYiT_Xjf5w-1; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:10:35 -0400 X-MC-Unique: wpm3-OPRP2abzYiT_Xjf5w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B51892503; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 14:10:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.39.194.216]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAEC366FFF; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 14:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 15:10:29 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Kevin Wolf Subject: Re: Failing iotest 206 Message-ID: References: <87d526f8-53bc-c196-6d5c-72b78a49518b@redhat.com> <20210720011151.l66z3q5hfc7urcfv@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.7 (2021-05-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=berrange@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -34 X-Spam_score: -3.5 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.699, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Thomas Huth , Eric Blake , QEMU Developers , Qemu-block Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 07:17:47PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 20.07.2021 um 10:32 hat Daniel P. Berrangé geschrieben: > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 08:12:58PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 10:06:01AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > iotest 206 fails for me with: > > > > > > > > > > > --- 206.out > > > > +++ 206.out.bad > > > > @@ -99,55 +99,19 @@ > > > > > > > > {"execute": "blockdev-create", "arguments": {"job-id": "job0", "options": > > > > {"driver": "qcow2", "encrypt": {"cipher-alg": "twofish-128", "cipher-mode": > > > > "ctr", "format": "luks", "hash-alg": "sha1", "iter-time": 10, "ivgen-alg": > > > > "plain64", "ivgen-hash-alg": "md5", "key-secret": "keysec0"}, "file": > > > > {"driver": "file", "filename": "TEST_DIR/PID-t.qcow2"}, "size": 33554432}}} > > > > {"return": {}} > > > > +Job failed: Unsupported cipher algorithm twofish-128 with ctr mode > > > > {"execute": "job-dismiss", "arguments": {"id": "job0"}} > > > > {"return": {}} > > > > > > > > > > > Looks like it is missing a check for the availability of the corresponding > > > > crypto stuff? Does anybody got a clue how to fix this? > > > > > > What system is this on? Which crypto library versions are installed? > > > I suspect this is related to Dan's effort to speed up crypto by > > > favoring gnutls over nettle, where the switch in favored libraries > > > failed to account for whether twofish-128 is supported? > > > > > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-07/msg03886.html > > > > Yes, the gnutls provider doesn't support twofish. This doesn't matter > > in real world usage because no one is seriously going to ask for twofish > > instead of AES for luks encryption. > > > > I guess that test suite was simply trying to ask for some non-default > > values though. > > Do we already have a patch somewhere that makes it use a different > value? Or if not, which value would be most likely to work everywhere? Ultimately there is only one cipher alg that is guaranteed 'aes', which can be used in two keysizes 128/256, and two modes cbc/xts. Sine aes-128 with xts is the default, if you want to exercise a non-default codepath for LUKS support, i'd suggest aes-256 with cbc mode, and essiv IV generator. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|