Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
        Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
        Kingdom.
        Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From:   David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190104102035.42qwwv4komjvnswh@sole.flsd.net>
References: <20190104102035.42qwwv4komjvnswh@sole.flsd.net> <20181211165938.1150-1-vt@altlinux.org> <20181213101233.6t7d5mxxkkavo46h@gondor.apana.org.au>
To:     Vitaly Chikunov <vt@altlinux.org>
Cc:     dhowells@redhat.com, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        davem@davemloft.net, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] akcipher: Introduce verify2 for public key algorithms
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <21903.1547655757.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Wed, 16 Jan 2019 16:22:37 +0000
Message-ID: <21904.1547655757@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Vitaly Chikunov <vt@altlinux.org> wrote:

> This will be hard to do since there is at least tree device that use
> this interface (and who know how much out of tree):
> 
>   drivers$ git grep cra_name.*rsa
>   crypto/caam/caampkc.c:          .cra_name = "rsa",
>   crypto/ccp/ccp-crypto-rsa.c:            .cra_name = "rsa",
>   crypto/qat/qat_common/qat_asym_algs.c:          .cra_name = "rsa",
> 
> Interface seems to be designed that verify() call is interchangeable
> with encrypt().
> 
> Two verify does not seem that bad since there is common code for the old
> interface that removes code duplication and simplifies driver
> implementation (RSA drivers only need to implement encrypt).

You could move the comparison into core crypto code if it's makes more sense
than moving the comparison to the crypto algorithm ->verify() call.  It makes
more sense than the upper layers having to cover the differences between the
algo modules.

David