Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:5bc5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id os5csp1523669pxb; Sat, 16 Oct 2021 12:09:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyNrjxEaVrXQb0H+tsYJvae2u4/yaDoIv7BNUHtti3W8NwxgSMCnfkYSZX1YayWDuB+pJu/ X-Received: by 2002:a50:be8a:: with SMTP id b10mr29171854edk.235.1634411347564; Sat, 16 Oct 2021 12:09:07 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1634411347; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=VqyoMwOf7SgxLTrKjtNYuKUw+voUwZ1IQBylRSHfALilPSipVdLLbAcrOLtT05LcJn I0v0C0e1hfEFDrIEtNcqKMsJCo2m5w0gShS9+QsyzIwLPgkTb6n3xsdsvmo0Wwz1ADhG /E8L4Rbg/+NF78nMdEqNxJAMVoMLIePXdcf3pZhBOkdsop9uvY6EC0oUq21fz+b9RDJw H3/JvlHbSaqVZpS0yw2bB/zaJJPD+yK03AgTmR/IHnJb1y70oBdW42YUarQ5KbQkeaDB FXqovTGHdfa/DYzE5h2ea1h1mpOmYT8XYin2imaO6pEiUKVmzc96CwfKldQGBsp3Lbkt jAwA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:user-agent :content-transfer-encoding:references:in-reply-to:date:to:from :subject:message-id:dkim-signature; bh=fWcVkFP52FOs/xPDPEmntNU+EM79bIknhYN49kApNB4=; b=ZnjoN5NaphH750DPAFjSzTdDtFUNp3px10HH1cMCzDTzyiOIppUcOQR5aLz+Ys0Mhe h2X41hu+dFQRmqfcYDWorxfAEdmrstExdK9ymZjQR4tQVJ2D32lCvqQ1usS9OD2PDnSu Y8L2HA98wIibI9gSo7HNzcPF7ssspH7Ltn+1kWVVx5g7BexbDfSY18yrfu4RoKu9Dl8x WYgOj7TDBxu3Ovc/F2IMGOVHNfAfYfC8kVEiWPUi6Z10LoKe6nQBOh8RVjIr0CGrqmwG KtKmmlAT8pxX6MoQ12tSXzHvzCZKBtdve6zn9qFPWXNtQsIOYaO+WIGr74V42X3AAOnb 0quQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=YYOZC4O9; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id qb15si15090298ejc.585.2021.10.16.12.08.27; Sat, 16 Oct 2021 12:09:07 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=YYOZC4O9; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240899AbhJOPWH (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 15 Oct 2021 11:22:07 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:60894 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232267AbhJOPWG (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Oct 2021 11:22:06 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E2F361181; Fri, 15 Oct 2021 15:19:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1634311200; bh=fWcVkFP52FOs/xPDPEmntNU+EM79bIknhYN49kApNB4=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=YYOZC4O91hPiL10R/oH31GOv5+FZW9yAD+ts/qdMMK/TcNeY9mPXAB0gH71liXiic 99nPBL5dLmNzjPFxqZAsnhnwpeZjtx4vVunzgJlnuA2bb/3XVQN8Go3D7y23I/ST4K 3ORRS0xJy+bBt9TNFJThGvytaAPCrzbSMCr6hSUYoPkGysgTvAGb9KO1w4y7ONwbxk mf47iBiT9GeewpngVjCJxzHp7u8/L9lHRNPqL1oZWDG6E6nZwa5mrugJUSUBX+wvpp nSXtdyiDm4POrtW70M3cx/IL8vZh/JMTuJHxOvdjlgllK7/A++/v9ZnBOZRJmUubU3 FqUD22sGJLv5A== Message-ID: <31d49f7785dd82fd2f0c1078c9a94153e3c389ac.camel@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tpm: use SM3 instead of SM3_256 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Tianjia Zhang , James Bottomley , Mimi Zohar , Jonathan Corbet , Herbert Xu , "David S. Miller" , Peter Huewe , Jason Gunthorpe , David Howells , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Jerry Snitselaar , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 18:19:57 +0300 In-Reply-To: <5db32f21-1df7-c92e-42a1-a2a85b29dfbf@linux.alibaba.com> References: <20211009130828.101396-1-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> <20211009130828.101396-3-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> <5db32f21-1df7-c92e-42a1-a2a85b29dfbf@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.0-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2021-10-14 at 17:46 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote: > Hi Jarkko, >=20 > On 10/12/21 11:21 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Sat, 2021-10-09 at 21:08 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote: > > > 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= . > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang > >=20 > > This is not enough to make any changes because the commit message > > does not describe what goes wrong if we keep it as it was. > >=20 > > /Jarkko > >=20 >=20 > This did not cause an error, just to use a more standard algorithm name.= =20 > If it is possible to use the SM3 name instead of SM3_256 if it can be=20 > specified from the source, it is of course better. I have contacted the= =20 > trustedcomputinggroup and have not yet received a reply. >=20 > Best regards, > Tianjia Why don't you then create a patch set that fully removes SM3_256, if it is incorrect? This looks a bit half-baked patch set. /Jarkko