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=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 4C898C3A589 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:24:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B3F22CF4 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:24:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1566296664; bh=L31s6t7x42v6wJG53Df7WfNP+8oNhH2SFuO8LCDn2co=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=00UroRm+m76oYVio2BgMnQPWMX3j2ZfIfrjz3tYym2SKMLNB9waDtf6C4qOd7GN1R zVm2ZrcDhBsJH1cBNOq4W6eRwvkBZSxiDly7YYrk+eLOZ5O+eUtQD/NWPdqHshHhLg yXSkGpd/uvMj1GKKOXESyL57ozrslqOm5lxF4zsk= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729378AbfHTKYX (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:24:23 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:44978 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729341AbfHTKYW (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:24:22 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f50.google.com (mail-lf1-f50.google.com [209.85.167.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 674CB22CF4; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:24:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1566296661; bh=L31s6t7x42v6wJG53Df7WfNP+8oNhH2SFuO8LCDn2co=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=I/CcpstfQYU/vMXJtcm9JPuCFcCCoy+ahKUC8q4SvHvOoPd3Wm1bFxMm6KXVaSEk5 ySTyKLoMtsJTaNUjjfP1ByYefnb89Lo6U/bAnOBgvU6rz4FALln9u2sUq7zpHSQgID ioEl90xpEgkN5q3iw0jzJ5P5cIA49+02bLHShS7A= Received: by mail-lf1-f50.google.com with SMTP id b29so3713311lfq.1; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 03:24:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV1CExCHWSBrLztueNUEYjj6OFfO6p8fa4uqnP5sVb28yMg/U4z HqE99o7wfSxH6KDJH2n8lUclOOGw+sbTTmJSPiI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxjrzH71f5snjBbfDKvg3rJNl8SpUphmyw6AjwWFKECN1FlsmtOVfA1P4SA3lnXbPN/hVAaeZSmFLNyxLUHArs= X-Received: by 2002:a19:c20b:: with SMTP id l11mr14856295lfc.106.1566296659635; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 03:24:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190819142226.1703-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <20190819142226.1703-3-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <20190819142226.1703-3-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 12:24:08 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] crypto: s5p - use correct block size of 1 for ctr(aes) To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, Vladimir Zapolskiy , Kamil Konieczny , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 16:24, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > Align the s5p ctr(aes) implementation with other implementations > of the same mode, by setting the block size to 1. > > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel > --- > drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c b/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c > index ef90c58edb1f..010f1bb20dad 100644 > --- a/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c > +++ b/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c > @@ -2173,7 +2173,7 @@ static struct crypto_alg algs[] = { > .cra_flags = CRYPTO_ALG_TYPE_ABLKCIPHER | > CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC | > CRYPTO_ALG_KERN_DRIVER_ONLY, > - .cra_blocksize = AES_BLOCK_SIZE, > + .cra_blocksize = 1, This makes sense but I wonder how does it work later with s5p_aes_crypt() and its check for request length alignment (AES_BLOCK_SIZE). With block size of 1 byte, I understand that req->nbytes can be for example 4 bytes which is not AES block aligned... If my reasoning is correct, then the CTR mode in s5p-sss is not fully working. Best regards, Krzysztof