Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:24:33 +0800
From:   Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
To:     Harald Freudenberger <freude@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux390-list@tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, ifranzki@linux.ibm.com,
        ebiggers@kernel.org, freude@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/crypto: Rework on paes implementation
Message-ID: <20191028082433.qdaabj2imf34ikam@gondor.apana.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191028073731.11778-1-freude@linux.ibm.com>
Organization: Core
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Harald Freudenberger <freude@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> @@ -165,18 +183,31 @@ static int ecb_paes_crypt(struct skcipher_request *req, unsigned long modifier)
>        struct skcipher_walk walk;
>        unsigned int nbytes, n, k;
>        int ret;
> +       struct {
> +               u8 key[MAXPROTKEYSIZE];
> +       } param;
> 
>        ret = skcipher_walk_virt(&walk, req, false);
> +       if (ret)
> +               return ret;
> +
> +       spin_lock(&ctx->pk_lock);
> +       memcpy(param.key, ctx->pk.protkey, MAXPROTKEYSIZE);
> +       spin_unlock(&ctx->pk_lock);

I think using a plain spin lock is unsafe as you may have callers
from both kernel thread context and BH context.  So you need to
have at least a spin_lock_bh here.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt