Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 23 Jul 2021 14:43:28 +0800
From:   Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
        brendanhiggins@google.com, davidgow@google.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 1/2] crypto: tcrypt: minimal conversion to run under
 KUnit
Message-ID: <20210723064328.GA7986@gondor.apana.org.au>
References: <20210715213138.1363079-1-dlatypov@google.com>
 <20210715213138.1363079-2-dlatypov@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210715213138.1363079-2-dlatypov@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 02:31:37PM -0700, Daniel Latypov wrote:
>> == Questions ==
> * does this seem like it would make running the test easier?

I don't mind.  tcrypt these days isn't used so much for correctness
testing.  It's mostly being used for speed testing.  A secondary
use is to instantiate templates.

> * does `tvmem` actually need page-aligned buffers?

I think it may be needed for those split-SG test cases where
we deliberately create a buffer that straddles a page boundary.

> * I have no clue how FIPS intersects with all of this.

It doesn't really matter because in FIPS mode when a correctness
test fails the kernel panics.

>   * would it be fine to leave the test code built-in for FIPS instead of
>   returning -EAGAIN?

The returning -EAGAIN is irrelevant in FIPS mode.  It's more of
an aid in normal mode when you use tcrypt for speed testing.

Thanks,
-- 
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