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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] crypto: fix mismatched hash algorithm name
 sm3-256 to sm3
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>,
        herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, davem@davemloft.net,
        jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, ebiggers@kernel.org,
        dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com
Cc:     linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Mon, 17 Feb 2020 20:33:18 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20200217093649.97938-2-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
References: <20200217093649.97938-1-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
         <20200217093649.97938-2-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <1581989598.8515.233.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-02-17 at 17:36 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> The name sm3-256 is defined in hash_algo_name in hash_info, but the
> algorithm name implemented in sm3_generic.c is sm3, which will cause
> the sm3-256 algorithm to be not found in some application scenarios of
> the hash algorithm, and an ENOENT error will occur. For example,
> IMA, keys, and other subsystems that reference hash_algo_name all use
> the hash algorithm of sm3.
> 
> According to https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-oscca-cfrg-sm3-01.html,
> SM3 always produces a 256-bit hash value and there are no plans for
> other length development, so there is no ambiguity in the name of sm3.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
> Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>

The previous version of this patch set is queued in the next-
integrity-testing branch.  That version of this patch didn't
change TPM_ALG_SM3_256.  Unless the TPM standard was modified, the TPM
spec refers to it as TPM_ALG_SM3_256.  Has that changed?

Mimi