The flow of the complete function (xxx_done) in gcm.c is as follow:
void complete(struct crypto_async_request *areq, int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
if (!err) {
err = async_next_step();
if (err == -EINPROGRESS || err == -EBUSY)
return;
}
complete_for_next_step(areq, err);
}
But *areq may be destroyed in async_next_step(), this makes
complete_for_next_step() can not work properly. To fix this, one of
following methods is used for each complete function.
- Add a __complete() for each complete(), which accept struct
aead_request *req instead of areq, so avoid using areq after it is
destroyed.
- Expand complete_for_next_step().
The fixing method is based on the idea of Herbert Xu.
Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <[email protected]>
---
crypto/gcm.c | 120 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 86 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
--- a/crypto/gcm.c
+++ b/crypto/gcm.c
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ struct crypto_rfc4106_ctx {
struct crypto_gcm_ghash_ctx {
unsigned int cryptlen;
struct scatterlist *src;
- crypto_completion_t complete;
+ void (*complete)(struct aead_request *req, int err);
};
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx {
@@ -267,54 +267,73 @@ static int gcm_hash_final(struct aead_re
return crypto_ahash_final(ahreq);
}
-static void gcm_hash_final_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void __gcm_hash_final_done(struct aead_request *req,
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
+ int err)
{
- struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
- struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
struct crypto_gcm_ghash_ctx *gctx = &pctx->ghash_ctx;
if (!err)
crypto_xor(pctx->auth_tag, pctx->iauth_tag, 16);
- gctx->complete(areq, err);
+ gctx->complete(req, err);
}
-static void gcm_hash_len_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void gcm_hash_final_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq, int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
+ __gcm_hash_final_done(req, pctx, err);
+}
+
+static void __gcm_hash_len_done(struct aead_request *req,
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
+ int err)
+{
if (!err) {
err = gcm_hash_final(req, pctx);
if (err == -EINPROGRESS || err == -EBUSY)
return;
}
- gcm_hash_final_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_final_done(req, pctx, err);
}
-static void gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void gcm_hash_len_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq, int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
+ __gcm_hash_len_done(req, pctx, err);
+}
+
+static void __gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(struct aead_request *req,
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
+ int err)
+{
if (!err) {
err = gcm_hash_len(req, pctx);
if (err == -EINPROGRESS || err == -EBUSY)
return;
}
- gcm_hash_len_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_len_done(req, pctx, err);
}
-static void gcm_hash_crypt_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
+ int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
+
+ __gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(req, pctx, err);
+}
+
+static void __gcm_hash_crypt_done(struct aead_request *req,
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
+ int err)
+{
struct crypto_gcm_ghash_ctx *gctx = &pctx->ghash_ctx;
unsigned int remain;
@@ -327,14 +346,21 @@ static void gcm_hash_crypt_done(struct c
return;
}
- gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(req, pctx, err);
}
-static void gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void gcm_hash_crypt_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq, int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
+
+ __gcm_hash_crypt_done(req, pctx, err);
+}
+
+static void __gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(struct aead_request *req,
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
+ int err)
+{
struct crypto_gcm_ghash_ctx *gctx = &pctx->ghash_ctx;
crypto_completion_t complete;
unsigned int remain = 0;
@@ -350,16 +376,24 @@ static void gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(s
}
if (remain)
- gcm_hash_crypt_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_crypt_done(req, pctx, err);
else
- gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_crypt_remain_done(req, pctx, err);
}
-static void gcm_hash_assoc_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
+ int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
+
+ __gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(req, pctx, err);
+}
+
+static void __gcm_hash_assoc_done(struct aead_request *req,
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
+ int err)
+{
unsigned int remain;
if (!err) {
@@ -371,14 +405,21 @@ static void gcm_hash_assoc_done(struct c
return;
}
- gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(req, pctx, err);
}
-static void gcm_hash_init_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void gcm_hash_assoc_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq, int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
+
+ __gcm_hash_assoc_done(req, pctx, err);
+}
+
+static void __gcm_hash_init_done(struct aead_request *req,
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
+ int err)
+{
crypto_completion_t complete;
unsigned int remain = 0;
@@ -393,9 +434,17 @@ static void gcm_hash_init_done(struct cr
}
if (remain)
- gcm_hash_assoc_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_assoc_done(req, pctx, err);
else
- gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(areq, err);
+ __gcm_hash_assoc_remain_done(req, pctx, err);
+}
+
+static void gcm_hash_init_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq, int err)
+{
+ struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
+ struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
+
+ __gcm_hash_init_done(req, pctx, err);
}
static int gcm_hash(struct aead_request *req,
@@ -457,10 +506,8 @@ static void gcm_enc_copy_hash(struct aea
crypto_aead_authsize(aead), 1);
}
-static void gcm_enc_hash_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+static void gcm_enc_hash_done(struct aead_request *req, int err)
{
- struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
if (!err)
@@ -470,7 +517,7 @@ static void gcm_enc_hash_done(struct cry
}
static void gcm_encrypt_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
- int err)
+ int err)
{
struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
@@ -479,9 +526,13 @@ static void gcm_encrypt_done(struct cryp
err = gcm_hash(req, pctx);
if (err == -EINPROGRESS || err == -EBUSY)
return;
+ else if (!err) {
+ crypto_xor(pctx->auth_tag, pctx->iauth_tag, 16);
+ gcm_enc_copy_hash(req, pctx);
+ }
}
- gcm_enc_hash_done(areq, err);
+ aead_request_complete(req, err);
}
static int crypto_gcm_encrypt(struct aead_request *req)
@@ -538,9 +589,8 @@ static void gcm_decrypt_done(struct cryp
aead_request_complete(req, err);
}
-static void gcm_dec_hash_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq, int err)
+static void gcm_dec_hash_done(struct aead_request *req, int err)
{
- struct aead_request *req = areq->data;
struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx = crypto_gcm_reqctx(req);
struct ablkcipher_request *abreq = &pctx->u.abreq;
struct crypto_gcm_ghash_ctx *gctx = &pctx->ghash_ctx;
@@ -552,9 +602,11 @@ static void gcm_dec_hash_done(struct cry
err = crypto_ablkcipher_decrypt(abreq);
if (err == -EINPROGRESS || err == -EBUSY)
return;
+ else if (!err)
+ err = crypto_gcm_verify(req, pctx);
}
- gcm_decrypt_done(areq, err);
+ aead_request_complete(req, err);
}
static int crypto_gcm_decrypt(struct aead_request *req)
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 03:24:14PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> The flow of the complete function (xxx_done) in gcm.c is as follow:
Thanks the patch looks pretty good overall.
> -static void gcm_hash_final_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
> - int err)
> +static void __gcm_hash_final_done(struct aead_request *req,
> + struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
> + int err)
Just one nit though, do we really need to carry this pctx around
everywhere? It seems to me that it's always crypto_gcm_reqctx(req),
no?
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[email protected]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 03:02 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 03:24:14PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > The flow of the complete function (xxx_done) in gcm.c is as follow:
>
> Thanks the patch looks pretty good overall.
>
> > -static void gcm_hash_final_done(struct crypto_async_request *areq,
> > - int err)
> > +static void __gcm_hash_final_done(struct aead_request *req,
> > + struct crypto_gcm_req_priv_ctx *pctx,
> > + int err)
>
> Just one nit though, do we really need to carry this pctx around
> everywhere? It seems to me that it's always crypto_gcm_reqctx(req),
> no?
Yes. This is for performance only. Because crypto_gcm_reqctx(req) is not
so trivial (it needs access tfm), and used by every xxx_done function,
so I think it is better to just call crypto_gcm_reqctx once and pass it
down. Do you think so?
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:49:59AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
>
> Yes. This is for performance only. Because crypto_gcm_reqctx(req) is not
> so trivial (it needs access tfm), and used by every xxx_done function,
> so I think it is better to just call crypto_gcm_reqctx once and pass it
> down. Do you think so?
Since we only support blocksize == 16, that means the alignment
cannot exceed 16 bytes. So just always align to 16 bytes and that
should make crypto_gcm_reqctx trivial once optimised by the
compiler.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[email protected]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 11:10 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:49:59AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> >
> > Yes. This is for performance only. Because crypto_gcm_reqctx(req) is not
> > so trivial (it needs access tfm), and used by every xxx_done function,
> > so I think it is better to just call crypto_gcm_reqctx once and pass it
> > down. Do you think so?
>
> Since we only support blocksize == 16, that means the alignment
> cannot exceed 16 bytes. So just always align to 16 bytes and that
> should make crypto_gcm_reqctx trivial once optimised by the
> compiler.
Does it seem a little tricky?
Anyway, I will prepare a patch for pure bug fix, and leave performance
optimization for later.
Best Regards,
Huang Ying