[PATCH v3 2/4] crypto: talitos - fix hash on SEC1.
Christophe Leroy
christophe.leroy at c-s.fr
Sat Jun 15 18:18:06 AEST 2019
Le 14/06/2019 à 13:32, Horia Geanta a écrit :
> On 6/13/2019 3:48 PM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> @@ -336,15 +336,18 @@ static void flush_channel(struct device *dev, int ch, int error, int reset_ch)
>> tail = priv->chan[ch].tail;
>> while (priv->chan[ch].fifo[tail].desc) {
>> __be32 hdr;
>> + struct talitos_edesc *edesc;
>>
>> request = &priv->chan[ch].fifo[tail];
>> + edesc = container_of(request->desc, struct talitos_edesc, desc);
> Not needed for all cases, should be moved to the block that uses it.
Ok.
>
>>
>> /* descriptors with their done bits set don't get the error */
>> rmb();
>> if (!is_sec1)
>> hdr = request->desc->hdr;
>> else if (request->desc->next_desc)
>> - hdr = (request->desc + 1)->hdr1;
>> + hdr = ((struct talitos_desc *)
>> + (edesc->buf + edesc->dma_len))->hdr1;
>> else
>> hdr = request->desc->hdr1;
>>
> [snip]
>> @@ -2058,7 +2065,18 @@ static int ahash_process_req(struct ahash_request *areq, unsigned int nbytes)
>> sg_copy_to_buffer(areq->src, nents,
>> ctx_buf + req_ctx->nbuf, offset);
>> req_ctx->nbuf += offset;
>> - req_ctx->psrc = areq->src;
>> + for (sg = areq->src; sg && offset >= sg->length;
>> + offset -= sg->length, sg = sg_next(sg))
>> + ;
>> + if (offset) {
>> + sg_init_table(req_ctx->bufsl, 2);
>> + sg_set_buf(req_ctx->bufsl, sg_virt(sg) + offset,
>> + sg->length - offset);
>> + sg_chain(req_ctx->bufsl, 2, sg_next(sg));
>> + req_ctx->psrc = req_ctx->bufsl;
> Isn't this what scatterwalk_ffwd() does?
Thanks for pointing this, I wasn't aware of that function. Looking at it
it seems to do the same. Unfortunately, some tests fails with 'wrong
result' when using it instead.
Comparing the results of scatterwalk_ffwd() with what I get with my open
codying, I see the following difference:
scatterwalk_ffwd() uses sg_page(sg) + sg->offset + len
while my open codying results in virt_to_page(sg_virt(sg) + len)
When sg->offset + len is greater than PAGE_SIZE, the resulting SG entry
is different allthough valid in both cases. I think this difference
results in sg_copy_to_buffer() failing. I'm still investigating. Any idea ?
Christophe
>
> Horia
>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list