Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= <heiko@sntech.de>
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>, christoph.muellner@vrull.eu
Cc:     palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
        aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
        davem@davemloft.net, conor.dooley@microchip.com,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] RISC-V: crypto: add accelerated GCM GHASH implementation
Date:   Wed, 05 Apr 2023 17:04:57 +0200
Message-ID: <45936818.fMDQidcC6G@diego>
In-Reply-To: <2102949.OBFZWjSADL@diego>
References: <20230329140642.2186644-1-heiko.stuebner@vrull.eu>
 <ZCSFXIAnl6LTVLJL@gmail.com> <2102949.OBFZWjSADL@diego>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Precedence: bulk

Hi again,

Am Mittwoch, 29. M?rz 2023, 21:20:21 CEST schrieb Heiko St?bner:
> Am Mittwoch, 29. M?rz 2023, 20:37:16 CEST schrieb Eric Biggers:
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 04:06:42PM +0200, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/crypto/ghash-riscv64-zbc.pl b/arch/riscv/crypto/ghash-riscv64-zbc.pl
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..691231ffa11c
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/crypto/ghash-riscv64-zbc.pl
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,400 @@
> > > +#! /usr/bin/env perl
> > > +# Copyright 2022 The OpenSSL Project Authors. All Rights Reserved.
> > > +#
> > > +# Licensed under the Apache License 2.0 (the "License").  You may not use
> > > +# this file except in compliance with the License.  You can obtain a copy
> > > +# in the file LICENSE in the source distribution or at
> > > +# https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html
> > 
> > My understanding is that code that is licensed under (only) the Apache License
> > 2.0 cannot be included in GPLv2 programs such as the Linux kernel.
> 
> Thanks a lot for pointing out that possible licensing issue.
> It seems I'm not touching enough non-GPL code most days to keep that
> in the front of my mind :-) .
> 
> 
> > Is this code written by Andy Polyakov?  What's been done in the past for his
> > code is that he re-releases it in CRYPTOGAMS at
> > https://github.com/dot-asm/cryptogams with a Linux kernel compatible license.
> > The Linux kernel then takes the code from there instead of from OpenSSL.
> 
> The git log for the original openssl ".pl" thankfully only contains
> @vrull.eu addresses, so getting this in a compatible license shouldn't be
> overly hard - I hope.

just to follow up with the current state.

We're currently trying to see if openSSL allows us to dual-license the
files inside openssl itself [0]. It looks a bit like we're the first to
try something like this, so the decision gets to be made by the OMC.

If that fails, we'll provide our own files dual-licensed in a separate
repository, similar to Andy's way of doing things.

Heiko

[0] https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20649