Received: by 2002:a25:ab43:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id u61csp2833867ybi; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 11:08:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwC2ZHnB8FPD+pPCED+WOLBfgy7hlxijY01vw51r1SmRQ1aW5uLHfF/EYqsErEdQjk2k7Ig X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:9a95:: with SMTP id e21mr57424pjp.98.1560794907681; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 11:08:27 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1560794907; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=qkQvrz0WClf3o9tr0UsQZen82kswaHEGciHOz902170KtiOJoX65vR855esbgBVyf1 yUHZBBiUZK/ivByspQ6/RVtidns5Qts+d29lBxNSKO3S3YBg54DOoeArSIHt2FJNPHT5 OKNMAiEnRfjohwUqsC6YsqR71mBihP5pqp/gVcnjSQc0QLIld7aaD0DGmVB+80NsiDM2 PxA3ZQgwxhxAPk0vBLFBdt5DxZ9WI6MyoscGiFGaKa4WJJlymnZEiVhqiQmpZx5UJmGz qYD6xE57lzOIRVnrsI0GvrhDTBlOBqn7yrHpgDcvbwcOk0MhHtWgVemNSEbPydS9gRYB caSw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject; bh=pDFynlitkebfbG2Knx0KovdYDIW/0DjKeGlf57iFZYY=; b=BOkn5Yb4QJMcIOiLHakTJqL69w8TFCUscMn0Gqj7ag7B6dIpuTnCKOS2Tb0Ty0pqG6 Z87CknJLbZzz9OuGR3i1PLy9XZdKhZZ1JTAA+7FYnotbHYTRmkqeQEcQ133WnoZVhv7T j9XFfpPzU+m4x6U5l9j3bA1Gofbd4Oj4fc9nBmd8XYcO90Ek0xlrHIx1AXOZcvLV8gKm veXkzEwedFVo9RCPK9xM6diMy4j7mYyV6aQv+vcaXom5+F0FmZQJQ/jcDRnpgGyRfZ4y u5bMFHXDYiqnozp4Pusly71Gd/7V7VccfjSiazQxZRAsPTL82smZfFPQncXaLeno09w5 WsFA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w7si11001160pgs.168.2019.06.17.11.08.11; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 11:08:27 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726822AbfFQSH2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:07:28 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:17808 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725764AbfFQSH2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:07:28 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5HI7PwW079167 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:07:27 -0400 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2t6fmfrjp2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:07:26 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 19:07:23 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Mon, 17 Jun 2019 19:07:19 +0100 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x5HI7ImH53543130 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:07:18 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A32CFA4053; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:07:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B031A4059; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:07:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.81.90]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:07:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima: dynamically allocate shash_desc From: Mimi Zohar To: Arnd Bergmann , Dmitry Kasatkin , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen , Stefan Berger , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:07:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1560786951.4072.103.camel@linux.ibm.com> References: <20190617115838.2397872-1-arnd@arndb.de> <1560786951.4072.103.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19061718-0008-0000-0000-000002F48A92 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19061718-0009-0000-0000-000022619DAC Message-Id: <1560794826.4072.169.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-06-17_07:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906170162 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2019-06-17 at 11:55 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Mon, 2019-06-17 at 13:20 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On 32-bit ARM, we get a warning about excessive stack usage when > > building with clang. > > > > security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c:504:5: error: stack frame size > > of 1152 bytes in function 'ima_calc_field_array_hash' [-Werror,- > > Wframe-larger-than=] > > I'm definitely not seeing this.  Is this problem a result of non > upstreamed patches?  For sha1, currently the only possible hash > algorithm, I'm seeing 664. Every time a measurement is added to the measurement list, the memory would be allocated/freed.  The frequency of new measurements is policy dependent.  For performance reasons, I'd prefer if the allocation remains on the stack. Mimi