Le Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 10:33:01AM +0300, Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 11:00:09PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 08:45:22AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 10:07:48PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > From: Eric Biggers <ebigg...@google.com>
> > > >
> > > > crypto_stats_get() is a no-op when the kernel is compiled without
> > > > CONFIG_CRYPTO_STATS, so pairing it with crypto_alg_put() unconditionally
> > > > (as crypto_rng_reset() does) is wrong.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Presumably the intention was that _get() and _put() should always pair.
> > > It's really ugly and horrible that they don't. We could have
> > > predicted bug like this would happen and will continue to happen until
> > > the crypto_stats_get() is renamed.
> > >
> >
> > Well, the crypto stats stuff has always been pretty broken, so I don't think
> > people have looked at it too closely. Currently crypto_stats_get() pairs
> > with
> > one of the functions that tallies the statistics, such as
> > crypto_stats_rng_seed() or crypto_stats_aead_encrypt(). What change are you
> > suggesting, exactly? Maybe moving the conditional crypto_alg_put() into a
> > new
> > function crypto_stats_put() and moving it into the callers? Or do you
> > think the
> > functions should just be renamed to something like crypto_stats_begin() and
> > crypto_stats_end_{rng_seed,aead_encrypt}()?
>
> To be honest, I misread the crypto_alg_put() thinking that it was
> crypto_*stats*_put(). My favourite fix would be to introduce a
> crypto_stats_put() which is a mirror of crypto_stats_get() and ifdeffed
> out if we don't have CONFIG_CRYPTO_STATS.
>
I agree it will be better.
I can work on adding crypto_stats_put() if you want.
Regards
