To:     Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc:     Keith Busch <keith.busch@wdc.com>, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
References: <20211202152358.60116-1-hare@suse.de>
 <20211213080853.GA21223@lst.de>
 <9853d36a-036c-7f2b-5fb4-b3fb4bae473f@suse.de>
 <4328e4f0-9674-9362-4ed5-89ec7edba4a2@grimberg.me>
 <56f1ce1c-2272-bed2-fd6b-642854b612bb@suse.de>
 <483836f5-f850-6eac-8c38-3f03db3189ab@grimberg.me>
From:   Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv8 00/12] nvme: In-band authentication support
Message-ID: <0c4613ff-ba30-c812-a6e9-1954d77b1d1b@suse.de>
Date:   Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:15:27 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <483836f5-f850-6eac-8c38-3f03db3189ab@grimberg.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 12/13/21 2:53 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> 
>>>>> So if we want to make progress on this we need the first 3 patches
>>>>> rewviewed by the crypto maintainers.  In fact I'd prefer to get them
>>>>> merged through the crypto tree as well, and would make sure we have
>>>>> a branch that pulls them in for the nvme changes.  I'll try to find
>>>>> some time to review the nvme bits as well.
>>>>>
>>>> That is _actually_ being addressed already.
>>>> Nicolai Stange send a patchset for ephemeral keys, FFDHE support, and
>>>> FIPS-related thingies for the in-kernel DH crypto implementation
>>>> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20211209090358.28231-1-nstange@suse.de/).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This obsoletes my preliminary patches, and I have ported my patchset
>>>> to run on top of those.
>>>>
>>>> Question is how to continue from here; I can easily rebase my patchset
>>>> and send it relative to Nicolais patches. But then we'll be bound to
>>>> the acceptance of those patches, so I'm not quite sure if that's the
>>>> best way to proceed.
>>>
>>> Don't know if we have a choice here... What is the alternative you are
>>> proposing?
>>
>> That's the thing, I don't really have a good alternative, either.
>> It's just that I have so no idea about the crypto subsystem, and
>> consequently wouldn't know how long we need to wait...
>>
>> But yeah, Nicolais patchset is far superior to my attempts, so I'd be
>> happy to ditch my preliminary attempts there.
> 
> Can we get a sense from the crypto folks to the state of Nicolais
> patchset?

According to Nicolai things look good, rules seem to be that it'll be
accepted if it has positive reviews (which it has) and no-one objected
(which no-one did).
Other than that one would have to ask the maintainer.
Herbert?

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		           Kernel Storage Architect
hare@suse.de			                  +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: Felix Imendörffer