Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] random: use BLAKE2s instead of SHA1 in extraction

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] random: use BLAKE2s instead of SHA1 in extraction

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Jason,

CC bpf, netdev

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 1:28 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:38 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > Unfortunately we cannot get rid of the sha1 code yet (lib/sha1.o is
> > built-in unconditionally), as there are other users...

kernel/bpf/core.c and net/ipv6/addrconf.c
Could they be switched to blake2s, too?

> I think that's just how things go and a price for progress. We're not
> going to stick with sha1, and blake2s has some nice properties that we
> certainly want. In the future hopefully this can decrease in other
> ways based on other future improvements. But that's where we are now.
>
> If you're really quite concerned about m68k code size, I can probably
> do some things to reduce that. For example, blake2s256_hmac is only
> used by wireguard and it could probably be made local there. And with
> some trivial loop re-rolling, I can shave off another 2300 bytes. And
> I bet I can find a few other things too. The question is: how
> important is this to you?

No problem, I just try to report all measurable impact on kernel size,
so there is some record of it.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] random: use BLAKE2s instead of SHA1 in extraction

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 1:51 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 1:28 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:38 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
> > <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > Unfortunately we cannot get rid of the sha1 code yet (lib/sha1.o is
> > > built-in unconditionally), as there are other users...
>
> kernel/bpf/core.c and net/ipv6/addrconf.c
> Could they be switched to blake2s, too?

I've brought this up before and the conclusion is that they probably
can't for compatibility reasons. No need to rehash that discussion
again. Alternatively, send a patch to netdev and see how it goes.

Anyway, we can follow up with the code size reduction patches we
discussed elsewhere in this thread.

[PATCH crypto 0/2] smaller blake2s code size on m68k and other small platforms

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi,

Geert emailed me this afternoon concerned about blake2s codesize on m68k
and other small systems. We identified two extremely effective ways of
chopping down the size. One of them moves some wireguard-specific things
into wireguard proper. The other one adds a slower codepath for
CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE configurations. I really don't like that
slower codepath, but since it is configuration gated, at least it stays
out of the way except for people who know they need a tiny kernel image

Thanks,
Jason

Jason A. Donenfeld (2):
  lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems
  lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard

 drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 include/crypto/blake2s.h      |  3 ---
 lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c  | 30 +++++++++++++----------
 lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c | 31 ------------------------
 lib/crypto/blake2s.c          | 37 ----------------------------
 5 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 89 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH crypto 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Re-wind the loops entirely on kernels optimized for code size. This is
really not good at all performance-wise. But on m68k, it shaves off 4k
of code size, which is apparently important.

Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
---
 lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c
index 75ccb3e633e6..990f000e22ee 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ void blake2s_compress_generic(struct blake2s_state *state, const u8 *block,
 {
 	u32 m[16];
 	u32 v[16];
-	int i;
+	int i, j;
 
 	WARN_ON(IS_ENABLED(DEBUG) &&
 		(nblocks > 1 && inc != BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE));
@@ -86,17 +86,23 @@ void blake2s_compress_generic(struct blake2s_state *state, const u8 *block,
 	G(r, 6, v[2], v[ 7], v[ 8], v[13]); \
 	G(r, 7, v[3], v[ 4], v[ 9], v[14]); \
 } while (0)
-		ROUND(0);
-		ROUND(1);
-		ROUND(2);
-		ROUND(3);
-		ROUND(4);
-		ROUND(5);
-		ROUND(6);
-		ROUND(7);
-		ROUND(8);
-		ROUND(9);
-
+		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE)) {
+			for (i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
+				for (j = 0; j < 8; ++j)
+					G(i, j, v[j % 4], v[((j + (j / 4)) % 4) + 4], v[((j + 2 * (j / 4)) % 4) + 8], v[((j + 3 * (j / 4)) % 4) + 12]);
+			}
+		} else {
+			ROUND(0);
+			ROUND(1);
+			ROUND(2);
+			ROUND(3);
+			ROUND(4);
+			ROUND(5);
+			ROUND(6);
+			ROUND(7);
+			ROUND(8);
+			ROUND(9);
+		}
 #undef G
 #undef ROUND
 
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH crypto 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Jason,

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 2:49 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> Re-wind the loops entirely on kernels optimized for code size. This is
> really not good at all performance-wise. But on m68k, it shaves off 4k
> of code size, which is apparently important.

On arm32:

add/remove: 1/0 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 160/-4212 (-4052)
Function                                     old     new   delta
blake2s_sigma                                  -     160    +160
blake2s_compress_generic                    4872     660   -4212
Total: Before=9846148, After=9842096, chg -0.04%

On arm64:

add/remove: 1/2 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 160/-4584 (-4424)
Function                                     old     new   delta
blake2s_sigma                                  -     160    +160
e843419@0710_00007634_e8a0                     8       -      -8
e843419@0441_0000423a_178c                     8       -      -8
blake2s_compress_generic                    5088     520   -4568
Total: Before=32800278, After=32795854, chg -0.01%

> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>

For the size reduction:
Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH crypto 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi Geert,

Thanks for testing this. However, I've *abandoned* this patch, due to
unacceptable performance hits, and figuring out that we can accomplish
basically the same thing without as large of a hit by modifying the
obsolete sha1 implementation.

Herbert - please do not apply this patch. Instead, later versions of
this patchset (e.g. v3 [1] and potentially later if it comes to that)
are what should be applied.

Jason

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220111220506.742067-1-Jason@zx2c4.com/

Re: [PATCH crypto 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems

[Eric Biggers]

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 02:49:33PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Re-wind the loops entirely on kernels optimized for code size. This is
> really not good at all performance-wise. But on m68k, it shaves off 4k
> of code size, which is apparently important.
> 
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
> ---
>  lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c
> index 75ccb3e633e6..990f000e22ee 100644
> --- a/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c
> +++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s-generic.c
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ void blake2s_compress_generic(struct blake2s_state *state, const u8 *block,
>  {
>  	u32 m[16];
>  	u32 v[16];
> -	int i;
> +	int i, j;
>  
>  	WARN_ON(IS_ENABLED(DEBUG) &&
>  		(nblocks > 1 && inc != BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE));
> @@ -86,17 +86,23 @@ void blake2s_compress_generic(struct blake2s_state *state, const u8 *block,
>  	G(r, 6, v[2], v[ 7], v[ 8], v[13]); \
>  	G(r, 7, v[3], v[ 4], v[ 9], v[14]); \
>  } while (0)
> -		ROUND(0);
> -		ROUND(1);
> -		ROUND(2);
> -		ROUND(3);
> -		ROUND(4);
> -		ROUND(5);
> -		ROUND(6);
> -		ROUND(7);
> -		ROUND(8);
> -		ROUND(9);
> -
> +		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE)) {
> +			for (i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
> +				for (j = 0; j < 8; ++j)
> +					G(i, j, v[j % 4], v[((j + (j / 4)) % 4) + 4], v[((j + 2 * (j / 4)) % 4) + 8], v[((j + 3 * (j / 4)) % 4) + 12]);
> +			}

How about unrolling the inner loop but not the outer one?  Wouldn't that give
most of the benefit, without hurting performance as much?

If you stay with this approach and don't unroll either loop, can you use 'r' and
'i' instead of 'i' and 'j', to match the naming in G()?

Also, please wrap lines at 80 columns.

- Eric

Re: [PATCH crypto 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 7:32 PM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
> How about unrolling the inner loop but not the outer one?  Wouldn't that give
> most of the benefit, without hurting performance as much?
>
> If you stay with this approach and don't unroll either loop, can you use 'r' and
> 'i' instead of 'i' and 'j', to match the naming in G()?

All this might work, sure. But as mentioned earlier, I've abandoned
this entirely, as I don't think this patch is necessary. See the v3
patchset instead:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220111220506.742067-1-Jason@zx2c4.com/

RE: [PATCH crypto 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems

[David Laight]

From: Jason A. Donenfeld
> Sent: 12 January 2022 18:51
> 
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 7:32 PM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
> > How about unrolling the inner loop but not the outer one?  Wouldn't that give
> > most of the benefit, without hurting performance as much?
> >
> > If you stay with this approach and don't unroll either loop, can you use 'r' and
> > 'i' instead of 'i' and 'j', to match the naming in G()?
> 
> All this might work, sure. But as mentioned earlier, I've abandoned
> this entirely, as I don't think this patch is necessary. See the v3
> patchset instead:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220111220506.742067-1-Jason@zx2c4.com/

I think you mentioned in another thread that the buffers (eg for IPv6
addresses) are actually often quite short.

For short buffers the 'rolled-up' loop may be of similar performance
to the unrolled one because of the time taken to read all the instructions
into the I-cache and decode them.
If the loop ends up small enough it will fit into the 'decoded loop
buffer' of modern Intel x86 cpu and won't even need decoding on
each iteration.

I really suspect that the heavily unrolled loop is only really fast
for big buffers and/or when it is already in the I-cache.
In real life I wonder how often that actually happens?
Especially for the uses the kernel is making of the code.

You need to benchmark single executions of the function
(doable on x86 with the performance monitor cycle counter)
to get typical/best clocks/byte figures rather than a
big average for repeated operation on a long buffer.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

Re: [PATCH crypto 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s-generic: reduce code size on small systems

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi David,

On 1/12/22, David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> I think you mentioned in another thread that the buffers (eg for IPv6
> addresses) are actually often quite short.
>
> For short buffers the 'rolled-up' loop may be of similar performance
> to the unrolled one because of the time taken to read all the instructions
> into the I-cache and decode them.
> If the loop ends up small enough it will fit into the 'decoded loop
> buffer' of modern Intel x86 cpu and won't even need decoding on
> each iteration.
>
> I really suspect that the heavily unrolled loop is only really fast
> for big buffers and/or when it is already in the I-cache.
> In real life I wonder how often that actually happens?
> Especially for the uses the kernel is making of the code.
>
> You need to benchmark single executions of the function
> (doable on x86 with the performance monitor cycle counter)
> to get typical/best clocks/byte figures rather than a
> big average for repeated operation on a long buffer.
>
> 	David

This patch has been dropped entirely from future revisions. The latest
as of writing is at:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220111220506.742067-1-Jason@zx2c4.com/

If you'd like to do something with blake2s, by all means submit a
patch and include various rationale and metrics and benchmarks. I do
not intend to do that myself and do not think my particular patch here
should be merged. But if you'd like to do something, feel free to CC
me for a review. However, as mentioned, I don't think much needs to be
done here.

Again, v3 is here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20220111220506.742067-1-Jason@zx2c4.com/

Thanks,
Jason

[PATCH crypto 2/2] lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Basically nobody should use blake2s in an HMAC construction; it already
has a keyed variant. But for unfortunately historical reasons, Noise,
used by WireGuard, uses HKDF quite strictly, which means we have to use
this. Because this really shouldn't be used by others, this commit moves
it into wireguard's noise.c locally, so that kernels that aren't using
WireGuard don't get this superfluous code baked in. On m68k systems,
this shaves off ~314 bytes.

Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 include/crypto/blake2s.h      |  3 ---
 lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c | 31 ------------------------
 lib/crypto/blake2s.c          | 37 ----------------------------
 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
index c0cfd9b36c0b..720952b92e78 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
@@ -302,6 +302,41 @@ void wg_noise_set_static_identity_private_key(
 		static_identity->static_public, private_key);
 }
 
+static void hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen, const size_t keylen)
+{
+	struct blake2s_state state;
+	u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
+	u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
+	int i;
+
+	if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
+		blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+		blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
+		blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
+	} else
+		memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
+		x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
+
+	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
+	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
+		x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
+
+	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
+
+	memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+}
+
 /* This is Hugo Krawczyk's HKDF:
  *  - https://eprint.iacr.org/2010/264.pdf
  *  - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5869
@@ -322,14 +357,14 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 		 ((third_len || third_dst) && (!second_len || !second_dst))));
 
 	/* Extract entropy from data into secret */
-	blake2s256_hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
+	hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
 
 	if (!first_dst || !first_len)
 		goto out;
 
 	/* Expand first key: key = secret, data = 0x1 */
 	output[0] = 1;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(first_dst, output, first_len);
 
 	if (!second_dst || !second_len)
@@ -337,8 +372,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 
 	/* Expand second key: key = secret, data = first-key || 0x2 */
 	output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 2;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
-			BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(second_dst, output, second_len);
 
 	if (!third_dst || !third_len)
@@ -346,8 +380,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 
 	/* Expand third key: key = secret, data = second-key || 0x3 */
 	output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 3;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
-			BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(third_dst, output, third_len);
 
 out:
diff --git a/include/crypto/blake2s.h b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
index bc3fb59442ce..4e30e1799e61 100644
--- a/include/crypto/blake2s.h
+++ b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
@@ -101,7 +101,4 @@ static inline void blake2s(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key,
 	blake2s_final(&state, out);
 }
 
-void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
-		     const size_t keylen);
-
 #endif /* _CRYPTO_BLAKE2S_H */
diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
index 5d9ea53be973..409e4b728770 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
  * #include <stdio.h>
  *
  * #include <openssl/evp.h>
- * #include <openssl/hmac.h>
  *
  * #define BLAKE2S_TESTVEC_COUNT	256
  *
@@ -58,16 +57,6 @@
  *	}
  *	printf("};\n\n");
  *
- *	printf("static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {\n");
- *
- *	HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), key, sizeof(key), buf, sizeof(buf), hash, NULL);
- *	print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
- *
- *	HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), buf, sizeof(buf), key, sizeof(key), hash, NULL);
- *	print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
- *
- *	printf("};\n");
- *
  *	return 0;
  *}
  */
@@ -554,15 +543,6 @@ static const u8 blake2s_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
     0xd6, 0x98, 0x6b, 0x07, 0x10, 0x65, 0x52, 0x65, },
 };
 
-static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
-  { 0xce, 0xe1, 0x57, 0x69, 0x82, 0xdc, 0xbf, 0x43, 0xad, 0x56, 0x4c, 0x70,
-    0xed, 0x68, 0x16, 0x96, 0xcf, 0xa4, 0x73, 0xe8, 0xe8, 0xfc, 0x32, 0x79,
-    0x08, 0x0a, 0x75, 0x82, 0xda, 0x3f, 0x05, 0x11, },
-  { 0x77, 0x2f, 0x0c, 0x71, 0x41, 0xf4, 0x4b, 0x2b, 0xb3, 0xc6, 0xb6, 0xf9,
-    0x60, 0xde, 0xe4, 0x52, 0x38, 0x66, 0xe8, 0xbf, 0x9b, 0x96, 0xc4, 0x9f,
-    0x60, 0xd9, 0x24, 0x37, 0x99, 0xd6, 0xec, 0x31, },
-};
-
 bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
 {
 	u8 key[BLAKE2S_KEY_SIZE];
@@ -607,16 +587,5 @@ bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
 		}
 	}
 
-	if (success) {
-		blake2s256_hmac(hash, buf, key, sizeof(buf), sizeof(key));
-		success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[0], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-
-		blake2s256_hmac(hash, key, buf, sizeof(key), sizeof(buf));
-		success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[1], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-
-		if (!success)
-			pr_err("blake2s256_hmac self-test: FAIL\n");
-	}
-
 	return success;
 }
diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
index 93f2ae051370..9364f79937b8 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
@@ -30,43 +30,6 @@ void blake2s_final(struct blake2s_state *state, u8 *out)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s_final);
 
-void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
-		     const size_t keylen)
-{
-	struct blake2s_state state;
-	u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
-	u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
-	int i;
-
-	if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
-		blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-		blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
-		blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
-	} else
-		memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
-
-	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
-		x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
-
-	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
-	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
-
-	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
-		x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
-
-	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
-
-	memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s256_hmac);
-
 static int __init blake2s_mod_init(void)
 {
 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_MANAGER_DISABLE_TESTS) &&
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH crypto 2/2] lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 at 14:49, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
>
> Basically nobody should use blake2s in an HMAC construction; it already
> has a keyed variant. But for unfortunately historical reasons, Noise,

-ly

> used by WireGuard, uses HKDF quite strictly, which means we have to use
> this. Because this really shouldn't be used by others, this commit moves
> it into wireguard's noise.c locally, so that kernels that aren't using
> WireGuard don't get this superfluous code baked in. On m68k systems,
> this shaves off ~314 bytes.
>
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com
> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>

Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>

> ---
>  drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  include/crypto/blake2s.h      |  3 ---
>  lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c | 31 ------------------------
>  lib/crypto/blake2s.c          | 37 ----------------------------
>  4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
> index c0cfd9b36c0b..720952b92e78 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
> @@ -302,6 +302,41 @@ void wg_noise_set_static_identity_private_key(
>                 static_identity->static_public, private_key);
>  }
>
> +static void hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen, const size_t keylen)
> +{
> +       struct blake2s_state state;
> +       u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
> +       u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
> +       int i;
> +
> +       if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
> +               blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +               blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
> +               blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
> +       } else
> +               memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
> +
> +       for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
> +               x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
> +
> +       blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +       blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
> +       blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
> +       blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
> +
> +       for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
> +               x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
> +
> +       blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +       blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
> +       blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +       blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
> +
> +       memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +       memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
> +       memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +}
> +
>  /* This is Hugo Krawczyk's HKDF:
>   *  - https://eprint.iacr.org/2010/264.pdf
>   *  - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5869
> @@ -322,14 +357,14 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
>                  ((third_len || third_dst) && (!second_len || !second_dst))));
>
>         /* Extract entropy from data into secret */
> -       blake2s256_hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
> +       hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
>
>         if (!first_dst || !first_len)
>                 goto out;
>
>         /* Expand first key: key = secret, data = 0x1 */
>         output[0] = 1;
> -       blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +       hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
>         memcpy(first_dst, output, first_len);
>
>         if (!second_dst || !second_len)
> @@ -337,8 +372,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
>
>         /* Expand second key: key = secret, data = first-key || 0x2 */
>         output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 2;
> -       blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
> -                       BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +       hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
>         memcpy(second_dst, output, second_len);
>
>         if (!third_dst || !third_len)
> @@ -346,8 +380,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
>
>         /* Expand third key: key = secret, data = second-key || 0x3 */
>         output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 3;
> -       blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
> -                       BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> +       hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
>         memcpy(third_dst, output, third_len);
>
>  out:
> diff --git a/include/crypto/blake2s.h b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
> index bc3fb59442ce..4e30e1799e61 100644
> --- a/include/crypto/blake2s.h
> +++ b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
> @@ -101,7 +101,4 @@ static inline void blake2s(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key,
>         blake2s_final(&state, out);
>  }
>
> -void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
> -                    const size_t keylen);
> -
>  #endif /* _CRYPTO_BLAKE2S_H */
> diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
> index 5d9ea53be973..409e4b728770 100644
> --- a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
> +++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
> @@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
>   * #include <stdio.h>
>   *
>   * #include <openssl/evp.h>
> - * #include <openssl/hmac.h>
>   *
>   * #define BLAKE2S_TESTVEC_COUNT       256
>   *
> @@ -58,16 +57,6 @@
>   *     }
>   *     printf("};\n\n");
>   *
> - *     printf("static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {\n");
> - *
> - *     HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), key, sizeof(key), buf, sizeof(buf), hash, NULL);
> - *     print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
> - *
> - *     HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), buf, sizeof(buf), key, sizeof(key), hash, NULL);
> - *     print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
> - *
> - *     printf("};\n");
> - *
>   *     return 0;
>   *}
>   */
> @@ -554,15 +543,6 @@ static const u8 blake2s_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
>      0xd6, 0x98, 0x6b, 0x07, 0x10, 0x65, 0x52, 0x65, },
>  };
>
> -static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
> -  { 0xce, 0xe1, 0x57, 0x69, 0x82, 0xdc, 0xbf, 0x43, 0xad, 0x56, 0x4c, 0x70,
> -    0xed, 0x68, 0x16, 0x96, 0xcf, 0xa4, 0x73, 0xe8, 0xe8, 0xfc, 0x32, 0x79,
> -    0x08, 0x0a, 0x75, 0x82, 0xda, 0x3f, 0x05, 0x11, },
> -  { 0x77, 0x2f, 0x0c, 0x71, 0x41, 0xf4, 0x4b, 0x2b, 0xb3, 0xc6, 0xb6, 0xf9,
> -    0x60, 0xde, 0xe4, 0x52, 0x38, 0x66, 0xe8, 0xbf, 0x9b, 0x96, 0xc4, 0x9f,
> -    0x60, 0xd9, 0x24, 0x37, 0x99, 0xd6, 0xec, 0x31, },
> -};
> -
>  bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
>  {
>         u8 key[BLAKE2S_KEY_SIZE];
> @@ -607,16 +587,5 @@ bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
>                 }
>         }
>
> -       if (success) {
> -               blake2s256_hmac(hash, buf, key, sizeof(buf), sizeof(key));
> -               success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[0], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -
> -               blake2s256_hmac(hash, key, buf, sizeof(key), sizeof(buf));
> -               success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[1], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -
> -               if (!success)
> -                       pr_err("blake2s256_hmac self-test: FAIL\n");
> -       }
> -
>         return success;
>  }
> diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
> index 93f2ae051370..9364f79937b8 100644
> --- a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
> +++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
> @@ -30,43 +30,6 @@ void blake2s_final(struct blake2s_state *state, u8 *out)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s_final);
>
> -void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
> -                    const size_t keylen)
> -{
> -       struct blake2s_state state;
> -       u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
> -       u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
> -       int i;
> -
> -       if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
> -               blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -               blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
> -               blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
> -       } else
> -               memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
> -
> -       for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
> -               x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
> -
> -       blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -       blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
> -       blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
> -       blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
> -
> -       for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
> -               x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
> -
> -       blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -       blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
> -       blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -       blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
> -
> -       memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -       memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
> -       memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
> -}
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s256_hmac);
> -
>  static int __init blake2s_mod_init(void)
>  {
>         if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_MANAGER_DISABLE_TESTS) &&
> --
> 2.34.1
>

Re: [PATCH crypto 2/2] lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard

[Eric Biggers]

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 02:49:34PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Basically nobody should use blake2s in an HMAC construction; it already
> has a keyed variant. But for unfortunately historical reasons, Noise,
> used by WireGuard, uses HKDF quite strictly, which means we have to use
> this. Because this really shouldn't be used by others, this commit moves
> it into wireguard's noise.c locally, so that kernels that aren't using
> WireGuard don't get this superfluous code baked in. On m68k systems,
> this shaves off ~314 bytes.
> 
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com
> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>

- Eric

[PATCH crypto v2 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi,

Geert emailed me this afternoon concerned about blake2s codesize on m68k
and other small systems. We identified two effective ways of chopping
down the size. One of them moves some wireguard-specific things into
wireguard proper. The other one adds a slower codepath for small
machines to blake2s. This worked, and was v1 of this patchset, but I
wasn't so much of a fan. Then someone pointed out that the generic C
SHA-1 implementation is still unrolled, which is a *lot* of extra code.
Simply rerolling that saves about as much as v1 did. So, we instead do
that in this v2 patchset. SHA-1 is being phased out, and soon it won't
be included at all (hopefully). And nothing performance-oriented has
anything to do with it anyway.

The result of these two patches mitigates Geert's feared code size
increase for 5.17.

Thanks,
Jason


Jason A. Donenfeld (2):
  lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard
  lib/crypto: sha1: re-roll loops to reduce code size

 drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c |  45 +++++++++++--
 include/crypto/blake2s.h      |   3 -
 lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c |  31 ---------
 lib/crypto/blake2s.c          |  37 -----------
 lib/sha1.c                    | 117 ++++++++--------------------------
 5 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 169 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH crypto v2 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Basically nobody should use blake2s in an HMAC construction; it already
has a keyed variant. But unfortunately for historical reasons, Noise,
used by WireGuard, uses HKDF quite strictly, which means we have to use
this. Because this really shouldn't be used by others, this commit moves
it into wireguard's noise.c locally, so that kernels that aren't using
WireGuard don't get this superfluous code baked in. On m68k systems,
this shaves off ~314 bytes.

Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 include/crypto/blake2s.h      |  3 ---
 lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c | 31 ------------------------
 lib/crypto/blake2s.c          | 37 ----------------------------
 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
index c0cfd9b36c0b..720952b92e78 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
@@ -302,6 +302,41 @@ void wg_noise_set_static_identity_private_key(
 		static_identity->static_public, private_key);
 }
 
+static void hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen, const size_t keylen)
+{
+	struct blake2s_state state;
+	u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
+	u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
+	int i;
+
+	if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
+		blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+		blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
+		blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
+	} else
+		memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
+		x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
+
+	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
+	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
+		x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
+
+	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
+
+	memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+}
+
 /* This is Hugo Krawczyk's HKDF:
  *  - https://eprint.iacr.org/2010/264.pdf
  *  - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5869
@@ -322,14 +357,14 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 		 ((third_len || third_dst) && (!second_len || !second_dst))));
 
 	/* Extract entropy from data into secret */
-	blake2s256_hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
+	hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
 
 	if (!first_dst || !first_len)
 		goto out;
 
 	/* Expand first key: key = secret, data = 0x1 */
 	output[0] = 1;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(first_dst, output, first_len);
 
 	if (!second_dst || !second_len)
@@ -337,8 +372,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 
 	/* Expand second key: key = secret, data = first-key || 0x2 */
 	output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 2;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
-			BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(second_dst, output, second_len);
 
 	if (!third_dst || !third_len)
@@ -346,8 +380,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 
 	/* Expand third key: key = secret, data = second-key || 0x3 */
 	output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 3;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
-			BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(third_dst, output, third_len);
 
 out:
diff --git a/include/crypto/blake2s.h b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
index bc3fb59442ce..4e30e1799e61 100644
--- a/include/crypto/blake2s.h
+++ b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
@@ -101,7 +101,4 @@ static inline void blake2s(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key,
 	blake2s_final(&state, out);
 }
 
-void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
-		     const size_t keylen);
-
 #endif /* _CRYPTO_BLAKE2S_H */
diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
index 5d9ea53be973..409e4b728770 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
  * #include <stdio.h>
  *
  * #include <openssl/evp.h>
- * #include <openssl/hmac.h>
  *
  * #define BLAKE2S_TESTVEC_COUNT	256
  *
@@ -58,16 +57,6 @@
  *	}
  *	printf("};\n\n");
  *
- *	printf("static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {\n");
- *
- *	HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), key, sizeof(key), buf, sizeof(buf), hash, NULL);
- *	print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
- *
- *	HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), buf, sizeof(buf), key, sizeof(key), hash, NULL);
- *	print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
- *
- *	printf("};\n");
- *
  *	return 0;
  *}
  */
@@ -554,15 +543,6 @@ static const u8 blake2s_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
     0xd6, 0x98, 0x6b, 0x07, 0x10, 0x65, 0x52, 0x65, },
 };
 
-static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
-  { 0xce, 0xe1, 0x57, 0x69, 0x82, 0xdc, 0xbf, 0x43, 0xad, 0x56, 0x4c, 0x70,
-    0xed, 0x68, 0x16, 0x96, 0xcf, 0xa4, 0x73, 0xe8, 0xe8, 0xfc, 0x32, 0x79,
-    0x08, 0x0a, 0x75, 0x82, 0xda, 0x3f, 0x05, 0x11, },
-  { 0x77, 0x2f, 0x0c, 0x71, 0x41, 0xf4, 0x4b, 0x2b, 0xb3, 0xc6, 0xb6, 0xf9,
-    0x60, 0xde, 0xe4, 0x52, 0x38, 0x66, 0xe8, 0xbf, 0x9b, 0x96, 0xc4, 0x9f,
-    0x60, 0xd9, 0x24, 0x37, 0x99, 0xd6, 0xec, 0x31, },
-};
-
 bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
 {
 	u8 key[BLAKE2S_KEY_SIZE];
@@ -607,16 +587,5 @@ bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
 		}
 	}
 
-	if (success) {
-		blake2s256_hmac(hash, buf, key, sizeof(buf), sizeof(key));
-		success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[0], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-
-		blake2s256_hmac(hash, key, buf, sizeof(key), sizeof(buf));
-		success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[1], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-
-		if (!success)
-			pr_err("blake2s256_hmac self-test: FAIL\n");
-	}
-
 	return success;
 }
diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
index 93f2ae051370..9364f79937b8 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
@@ -30,43 +30,6 @@ void blake2s_final(struct blake2s_state *state, u8 *out)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s_final);
 
-void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
-		     const size_t keylen)
-{
-	struct blake2s_state state;
-	u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
-	u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
-	int i;
-
-	if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
-		blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-		blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
-		blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
-	} else
-		memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
-
-	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
-		x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
-
-	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
-	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
-
-	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
-		x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
-
-	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
-
-	memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s256_hmac);
-
 static int __init blake2s_mod_init(void)
 {
 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_MANAGER_DISABLE_TESTS) &&
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH crypto v2 2/2] lib/crypto: sha1: re-roll loops to reduce code size

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

With SHA-1 no longer being used for anything performance oriented, and
also soon to be phased out entirely, we can make up for the space added
by unrolled BLAKE2s by simply re-rolling SHA-1. Since SHA-1 is so much
more complex, re-rolling it more or less takes care of the code size
added by BLAKE2s. And eventually, hopefully we'll see SHA-1 removed
entirely from most small kernel builds.

Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
---
 lib/sha1.c | 117 ++++++++++++-----------------------------------------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/sha1.c b/lib/sha1.c
index 9bd1935a1472..f2acfa294e64 100644
--- a/lib/sha1.c
+++ b/lib/sha1.c
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/export.h>
 #include <linux/bitops.h>
+#include <linux/string.h>
 #include <crypto/sha1.h>
 #include <asm/unaligned.h>
 
@@ -83,109 +84,41 @@
  */
 void sha1_transform(__u32 *digest, const char *data, __u32 *array)
 {
-	__u32 A, B, C, D, E;
+	u32 d[5];
+	unsigned int i = 0;
 
-	A = digest[0];
-	B = digest[1];
-	C = digest[2];
-	D = digest[3];
-	E = digest[4];
+	memcpy(d, digest, sizeof(d));
 
 	/* Round 1 - iterations 0-16 take their input from 'data' */
-	T_0_15( 0, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_0_15( 1, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_0_15( 2, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_0_15( 3, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_0_15( 4, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_0_15( 5, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_0_15( 6, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_0_15( 7, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_0_15( 8, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_0_15( 9, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_0_15(10, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_0_15(11, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_0_15(12, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_0_15(13, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_0_15(14, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_0_15(15, A, B, C, D, E);
+	for (; i < 16; ++i)
+		T_0_15(i, d[(-6 - i) % 5], d[(-5 - i) % 5],
+		       d[(-4 - i) % 5], d[(-3 - i) % 5], d[(-2 - i) % 5]);
 
 	/* Round 1 - tail. Input from 512-bit mixing array */
-	T_16_19(16, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_16_19(17, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_16_19(18, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_16_19(19, B, C, D, E, A);
+	for (; i < 20; ++i)
+		T_16_19(i, d[(-6 - i) % 5], d[(-5 - i) % 5],
+			d[(-4 - i) % 5], d[(-3 - i) % 5], d[(-2 - i) % 5]);
 
 	/* Round 2 */
-	T_20_39(20, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(21, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(22, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(23, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(24, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_20_39(25, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(26, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(27, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(28, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(29, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_20_39(30, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(31, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(32, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(33, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(34, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_20_39(35, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(36, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(37, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(38, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(39, B, C, D, E, A);
+	for (; i < 40; ++i)
+		T_20_39(i, d[(-6 - i) % 5], d[(-5 - i) % 5],
+			d[(-4 - i) % 5], d[(-3 - i) % 5], d[(-2 - i) % 5]);
 
 	/* Round 3 */
-	T_40_59(40, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(41, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(42, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(43, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(44, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_40_59(45, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(46, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(47, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(48, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(49, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_40_59(50, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(51, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(52, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(53, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(54, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_40_59(55, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(56, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(57, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(58, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(59, B, C, D, E, A);
+	for (; i < 60; ++i)
+		T_40_59(i, d[(-6 - i) % 5], d[(-5 - i) % 5],
+			d[(-4 - i) % 5], d[(-3 - i) % 5], d[(-2 - i) % 5]);
 
 	/* Round 4 */
-	T_60_79(60, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(61, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(62, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(63, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(64, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_60_79(65, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(66, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(67, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(68, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(69, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_60_79(70, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(71, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(72, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(73, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(74, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_60_79(75, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(76, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(77, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(78, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(79, B, C, D, E, A);
-
-	digest[0] += A;
-	digest[1] += B;
-	digest[2] += C;
-	digest[3] += D;
-	digest[4] += E;
+	for (; i < 80; ++i)
+		T_60_79(i, d[(-6 - i) % 5], d[(-5 - i) % 5],
+			d[(-4 - i) % 5], d[(-3 - i) % 5], d[(-2 - i) % 5]);
+
+	digest[0] += d[0];
+	digest[1] += d[1];
+	digest[2] += d[2];
+	digest[3] += d[3];
+	digest[4] += d[4];
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(sha1_transform);
 
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH crypto v3 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi,

Geert emailed me this afternoon concerned about blake2s codesize on m68k
and other small systems. We identified two effective ways of chopping
down the size. One of them moves some wireguard-specific things into
wireguard proper. The other one adds a slower codepath for small
machines to blake2s. This worked, and was v1 of this patchset, but I
wasn't so much of a fan. Then someone pointed out that the generic C
SHA-1 implementation is still unrolled, which is a *lot* of extra code.
Simply rerolling that saves about as much as v1 did. So, we instead do
that in this patchset. SHA-1 is being phased out, and soon it won't
be included at all (hopefully). And nothing performance-oriented has
anything to do with it anyway.

The result of these two patches mitigates Geert's feared code size
increase for 5.17.

v3 improves on v2 by making the re-rolling of SHA-1 much simpler,
resulting in even larger code size reduction and much better
performance. The reason I'm sending yet a third version in such a short
amount of time is because the trick here feels obvious and substantial
enough that I'd hate for Geert to waste time measuring the impact of the
previous commit.

Thanks,
Jason

Jason A. Donenfeld (2):
  lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard
  lib/crypto: sha1: re-roll loops to reduce code size

 drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c | 45 ++++++++++++++---
 include/crypto/blake2s.h      |  3 --
 lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c | 31 ------------
 lib/crypto/blake2s.c          | 37 --------------
 lib/sha1.c                    | 95 ++++++-----------------------------
 5 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 158 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH crypto v3 1/2] lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Basically nobody should use blake2s in an HMAC construction; it already
has a keyed variant. But unfortunately for historical reasons, Noise,
used by WireGuard, uses HKDF quite strictly, which means we have to use
this. Because this really shouldn't be used by others, this commit moves
it into wireguard's noise.c locally, so that kernels that aren't using
WireGuard don't get this superfluous code baked in. On m68k systems,
this shaves off ~314 bytes.

Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 include/crypto/blake2s.h      |  3 ---
 lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c | 31 ------------------------
 lib/crypto/blake2s.c          | 37 ----------------------------
 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
index c0cfd9b36c0b..720952b92e78 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireguard/noise.c
@@ -302,6 +302,41 @@ void wg_noise_set_static_identity_private_key(
 		static_identity->static_public, private_key);
 }
 
+static void hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen, const size_t keylen)
+{
+	struct blake2s_state state;
+	u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
+	u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
+	int i;
+
+	if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
+		blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+		blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
+		blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
+	} else
+		memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
+		x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
+
+	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
+	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
+		x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
+
+	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
+
+	memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
+	memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+}
+
 /* This is Hugo Krawczyk's HKDF:
  *  - https://eprint.iacr.org/2010/264.pdf
  *  - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5869
@@ -322,14 +357,14 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 		 ((third_len || third_dst) && (!second_len || !second_dst))));
 
 	/* Extract entropy from data into secret */
-	blake2s256_hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
+	hmac(secret, data, chaining_key, data_len, NOISE_HASH_LEN);
 
 	if (!first_dst || !first_len)
 		goto out;
 
 	/* Expand first key: key = secret, data = 0x1 */
 	output[0] = 1;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(first_dst, output, first_len);
 
 	if (!second_dst || !second_len)
@@ -337,8 +372,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 
 	/* Expand second key: key = secret, data = first-key || 0x2 */
 	output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 2;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
-			BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(second_dst, output, second_len);
 
 	if (!third_dst || !third_len)
@@ -346,8 +380,7 @@ static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
 
 	/* Expand third key: key = secret, data = second-key || 0x3 */
 	output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] = 3;
-	blake2s256_hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1,
-			BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
+	hmac(output, output, secret, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
 	memcpy(third_dst, output, third_len);
 
 out:
diff --git a/include/crypto/blake2s.h b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
index bc3fb59442ce..4e30e1799e61 100644
--- a/include/crypto/blake2s.h
+++ b/include/crypto/blake2s.h
@@ -101,7 +101,4 @@ static inline void blake2s(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key,
 	blake2s_final(&state, out);
 }
 
-void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
-		     const size_t keylen);
-
 #endif /* _CRYPTO_BLAKE2S_H */
diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
index 5d9ea53be973..409e4b728770 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s-selftest.c
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
  * #include <stdio.h>
  *
  * #include <openssl/evp.h>
- * #include <openssl/hmac.h>
  *
  * #define BLAKE2S_TESTVEC_COUNT	256
  *
@@ -58,16 +57,6 @@
  *	}
  *	printf("};\n\n");
  *
- *	printf("static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {\n");
- *
- *	HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), key, sizeof(key), buf, sizeof(buf), hash, NULL);
- *	print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
- *
- *	HMAC(EVP_blake2s256(), buf, sizeof(buf), key, sizeof(key), hash, NULL);
- *	print_vec(hash, BLAKE2S_OUTBYTES);
- *
- *	printf("};\n");
- *
  *	return 0;
  *}
  */
@@ -554,15 +543,6 @@ static const u8 blake2s_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
     0xd6, 0x98, 0x6b, 0x07, 0x10, 0x65, 0x52, 0x65, },
 };
 
-static const u8 blake2s_hmac_testvecs[][BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __initconst = {
-  { 0xce, 0xe1, 0x57, 0x69, 0x82, 0xdc, 0xbf, 0x43, 0xad, 0x56, 0x4c, 0x70,
-    0xed, 0x68, 0x16, 0x96, 0xcf, 0xa4, 0x73, 0xe8, 0xe8, 0xfc, 0x32, 0x79,
-    0x08, 0x0a, 0x75, 0x82, 0xda, 0x3f, 0x05, 0x11, },
-  { 0x77, 0x2f, 0x0c, 0x71, 0x41, 0xf4, 0x4b, 0x2b, 0xb3, 0xc6, 0xb6, 0xf9,
-    0x60, 0xde, 0xe4, 0x52, 0x38, 0x66, 0xe8, 0xbf, 0x9b, 0x96, 0xc4, 0x9f,
-    0x60, 0xd9, 0x24, 0x37, 0x99, 0xd6, 0xec, 0x31, },
-};
-
 bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
 {
 	u8 key[BLAKE2S_KEY_SIZE];
@@ -607,16 +587,5 @@ bool __init blake2s_selftest(void)
 		}
 	}
 
-	if (success) {
-		blake2s256_hmac(hash, buf, key, sizeof(buf), sizeof(key));
-		success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[0], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-
-		blake2s256_hmac(hash, key, buf, sizeof(key), sizeof(buf));
-		success &= !memcmp(hash, blake2s_hmac_testvecs[1], BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-
-		if (!success)
-			pr_err("blake2s256_hmac self-test: FAIL\n");
-	}
-
 	return success;
 }
diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
index 93f2ae051370..9364f79937b8 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2s.c
@@ -30,43 +30,6 @@ void blake2s_final(struct blake2s_state *state, u8 *out)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s_final);
 
-void blake2s256_hmac(u8 *out, const u8 *in, const u8 *key, const size_t inlen,
-		     const size_t keylen)
-{
-	struct blake2s_state state;
-	u8 x_key[BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32)) = { 0 };
-	u8 i_hash[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE] __aligned(__alignof__(u32));
-	int i;
-
-	if (keylen > BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE) {
-		blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-		blake2s_update(&state, key, keylen);
-		blake2s_final(&state, x_key);
-	} else
-		memcpy(x_key, key, keylen);
-
-	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
-		x_key[i] ^= 0x36;
-
-	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, in, inlen);
-	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
-
-	for (i = 0; i < BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE; ++i)
-		x_key[i] ^= 0x5c ^ 0x36;
-
-	blake2s_init(&state, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	blake2s_update(&state, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	blake2s_final(&state, i_hash);
-
-	memcpy(out, i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-	memzero_explicit(x_key, BLAKE2S_BLOCK_SIZE);
-	memzero_explicit(i_hash, BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE);
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(blake2s256_hmac);
-
 static int __init blake2s_mod_init(void)
 {
 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_MANAGER_DISABLE_TESTS) &&
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH crypto v3 2/2] lib/crypto: sha1: re-roll loops to reduce code size

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

With SHA-1 no longer being used for anything performance oriented, and
also soon to be phased out entirely, we can make up for the space added
by unrolled BLAKE2s by simply re-rolling SHA-1. Since SHA-1 is so much
more complex, re-rolling it more or less takes care of the code size
added by BLAKE2s. And eventually, hopefully we'll see SHA-1 removed
entirely from most small kernel builds.

Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
---
 lib/sha1.c | 95 ++++++++----------------------------------------------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/sha1.c b/lib/sha1.c
index 9bd1935a1472..0494766fc574 100644
--- a/lib/sha1.c
+++ b/lib/sha1.c
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/export.h>
 #include <linux/bitops.h>
+#include <linux/string.h>
 #include <crypto/sha1.h>
 #include <asm/unaligned.h>
 
@@ -55,7 +56,8 @@
 #define SHA_ROUND(t, input, fn, constant, A, B, C, D, E) do { \
 	__u32 TEMP = input(t); setW(t, TEMP); \
 	E += TEMP + rol32(A,5) + (fn) + (constant); \
-	B = ror32(B, 2); } while (0)
+	B = ror32(B, 2); \
+	TEMP = E; E = D; D = C; C = B; B = A; A = TEMP; } while (0)
 
 #define T_0_15(t, A, B, C, D, E)  SHA_ROUND(t, SHA_SRC, (((C^D)&B)^D) , 0x5a827999, A, B, C, D, E )
 #define T_16_19(t, A, B, C, D, E) SHA_ROUND(t, SHA_MIX, (((C^D)&B)^D) , 0x5a827999, A, B, C, D, E )
@@ -84,6 +86,7 @@
 void sha1_transform(__u32 *digest, const char *data, __u32 *array)
 {
 	__u32 A, B, C, D, E;
+	unsigned int i = 0;
 
 	A = digest[0];
 	B = digest[1];
@@ -92,94 +95,24 @@ void sha1_transform(__u32 *digest, const char *data, __u32 *array)
 	E = digest[4];
 
 	/* Round 1 - iterations 0-16 take their input from 'data' */
-	T_0_15( 0, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_0_15( 1, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_0_15( 2, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_0_15( 3, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_0_15( 4, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_0_15( 5, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_0_15( 6, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_0_15( 7, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_0_15( 8, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_0_15( 9, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_0_15(10, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_0_15(11, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_0_15(12, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_0_15(13, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_0_15(14, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_0_15(15, A, B, C, D, E);
+	for (; i < 16; ++i)
+		T_0_15(i, A, B, C, D, E);
 
 	/* Round 1 - tail. Input from 512-bit mixing array */
-	T_16_19(16, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_16_19(17, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_16_19(18, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_16_19(19, B, C, D, E, A);
+	for (; i < 20; ++i)
+		T_16_19(i, A, B, C, D, E);
 
 	/* Round 2 */
-	T_20_39(20, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(21, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(22, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(23, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(24, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_20_39(25, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(26, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(27, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(28, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(29, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_20_39(30, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(31, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(32, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(33, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(34, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_20_39(35, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_20_39(36, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_20_39(37, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_20_39(38, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_20_39(39, B, C, D, E, A);
+	for (; i < 40; ++i)
+		T_20_39(i, A, B, C, D, E);
 
 	/* Round 3 */
-	T_40_59(40, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(41, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(42, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(43, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(44, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_40_59(45, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(46, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(47, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(48, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(49, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_40_59(50, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(51, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(52, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(53, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(54, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_40_59(55, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_40_59(56, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_40_59(57, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_40_59(58, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_40_59(59, B, C, D, E, A);
+	for (; i < 60; ++i)
+		T_40_59(i, A, B, C, D, E);
 
 	/* Round 4 */
-	T_60_79(60, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(61, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(62, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(63, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(64, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_60_79(65, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(66, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(67, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(68, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(69, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_60_79(70, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(71, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(72, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(73, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(74, B, C, D, E, A);
-	T_60_79(75, A, B, C, D, E);
-	T_60_79(76, E, A, B, C, D);
-	T_60_79(77, D, E, A, B, C);
-	T_60_79(78, C, D, E, A, B);
-	T_60_79(79, B, C, D, E, A);
+	for (; i < 80; ++i)
+		T_60_79(i, A, B, C, D, E);
 
 	digest[0] += A;
 	digest[1] += B;
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH crypto v3 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Jason,

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 11:05 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> Geert emailed me this afternoon concerned about blake2s codesize on m68k
> and other small systems. We identified two effective ways of chopping
> down the size. One of them moves some wireguard-specific things into
> wireguard proper. The other one adds a slower codepath for small
> machines to blake2s. This worked, and was v1 of this patchset, but I
> wasn't so much of a fan. Then someone pointed out that the generic C
> SHA-1 implementation is still unrolled, which is a *lot* of extra code.
> Simply rerolling that saves about as much as v1 did. So, we instead do
> that in this patchset. SHA-1 is being phased out, and soon it won't
> be included at all (hopefully). And nothing performance-oriented has
> anything to do with it anyway.
>
> The result of these two patches mitigates Geert's feared code size
> increase for 5.17.
>
> v3 improves on v2 by making the re-rolling of SHA-1 much simpler,
> resulting in even larger code size reduction and much better
> performance. The reason I'm sending yet a third version in such a short
> amount of time is because the trick here feels obvious and substantial
> enough that I'd hate for Geert to waste time measuring the impact of the
> previous commit.
>
> Thanks,
> Jason
>
> Jason A. Donenfeld (2):
>   lib/crypto: blake2s: move hmac construction into wireguard
>   lib/crypto: sha1: re-roll loops to reduce code size

Thanks for the series!

On m68k:
add/remove: 1/4 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 4/-4232 (-4228)
Function                                     old     new   delta
__ksymtab_blake2s256_hmac                     12       -     -12
blake2s_init.constprop                        94       -     -94
blake2s256_hmac                              302       -    -302
sha1_transform                              4402     582   -3820
Total: Before=4230537, After=4226309, chg -0.10%

Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH crypto v3 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi Geert,

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 12:00 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Thanks for the series!
>
> On m68k:
> add/remove: 1/4 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 4/-4232 (-4228)
> Function                                     old     new   delta
> __ksymtab_blake2s256_hmac                     12       -     -12
> blake2s_init.constprop                        94       -     -94
> blake2s256_hmac                              302       -    -302
> sha1_transform                              4402     582   -3820
> Total: Before=4230537, After=4226309, chg -0.10%
>
> Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>

Excellent, thanks for the breakdown. So this shaves off ~4k, which was
about what we were shooting for here, so I think indeed this series
accomplishes its goal of counteracting the addition of BLAKE2s.
Hopefully Herbert will apply this series for 5.17.

Jason

Re: [PATCH crypto v3 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[Herbert Xu]

Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
>
> Excellent, thanks for the breakdown. So this shaves off ~4k, which was
> about what we were shooting for here, so I think indeed this series
> accomplishes its goal of counteracting the addition of BLAKE2s.
> Hopefully Herbert will apply this series for 5.17.

As the patches that triggered this weren't part of the crypto
tree, this will have to go through the random tree if you want
them for 5.17.

Otherwise if you're happy to wait then I can pull them through
cryptodev.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

Re: [PATCH crypto v3 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

On 1/18/22, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> As the patches that triggered this weren't part of the crypto
> tree, this will have to go through the random tree if you want
> them for 5.17.

Sure, will do.

RE: [PATCH crypto v3 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[David Laight]

From: Jason A. Donenfeld
> Sent: 18 January 2022 11:43
> 
> On 1/18/22, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> > As the patches that triggered this weren't part of the crypto
> > tree, this will have to go through the random tree if you want
> > them for 5.17.
> 
> Sure, will do.

I've rammed the code through godbolt... https://godbolt.org/z/Wv64z9zG8

Some things I've noticed;

1) There is no point having all the inline functions.
   Far better to have real functions to do the work.
   Given the cost of hashing 64 bytes of data the extra
   function call won't matter.
   Indeed for repeated calls it will help because the required
   code will be in the I-cache.

2) The compiles I tried do manage to remove the blake2_sigma[][]
   when unrolling everything - which is a slight gain for the full
   unroll. But I doubt it is that significant if the access can
   get sensibly optimised.
   For non-x86 that might require all the values by multiplied by 4.

3) Although G() is a massive register dependency chain the compiler
   knows that G(,[0-3],) are independent and can execute in parallel.
   This does help execution time on multi-issue cpu (like x86).
   With care it ought to be possible to use the same code for G(,[4-7],)
   without stopping the compiler interleaving all the instructions.

4) I strongly suspect that using a loop for the rounds will have
   minimal impact on performance - especially if the first call is
   'cold cache'.
   But I've not got time to test the code.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

Re: [PATCH crypto v3 0/2] reduce code size from blake2s on m68k and other small platforms

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 1:45 PM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> I've rammed the code through godbolt... https://godbolt.org/z/Wv64z9zG8
>
> Some things I've noticed;

It seems like you've done a lot of work here but...

>    But I've not got time to test the code.

But you're not going to take it all the way. So it unfortunately
amounts to mailing list armchair optimization. That's too bad because
it really seems like you might be onto something worth seeing through.
As I've mentioned a few times now, I've dropped the blake2s
optimization patch, and I won't be developing that further. But it
appears as though you've really been captured by it, so I urge you:
please send a real patch with benchmarks on various platforms! (And CC
me on the patch.) Faster reference code would really be terrific.

Jason