On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 01:04:17PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers
>
> GCM instances can be created by either the "gcm" template, which only
> allows choosing the block cipher, e.g. "gcm(aes)"; or by "gcm_base",
> which allows choosing the ctr and ghash implementations, e.g.
> "gc
On 3/29/19 8:43 PM, YueHaibing wrote:
> Use kmemdup rather than duplicating its implementation
>
> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing
Acked-by: Gary R Hook
> ---
> drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp-crypto-rsa.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp-c
This driver has been completely broken since the very beginning
because it doesn't even have a setkey function. This means that
nobody has ever used it as it would crash during setkey.
This patch removes this driver.
Fixes: d293b640ebd ("crypto: mxc-scc - add basic driver for the...")
Signed-off
On Monday, April 1, 2019 11:44 AM, Pascal Van Leeuwen
wrote:
> > On Monday, April 1, 2019 10:04 AM, Vitaly Chikunov v...@altlinux.org wrote:
> >
> > > > Can you elaborate on why you want to use Streebog? When we added
> > > > Speck, we explained in great detail why it was useful from a
> > > > t
Hi Ted,
With the transition to 5.0, blk_update_bidi_request has been removed. This
function used to call add_disk_randomness. I see no replacement in the block
layer any more.
Thus, add_disk_randomness is now only invoked from the SCSI layer with 5.0. Is
that intended?
Ciao
Stephan
On 3/28/2019 4:36 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> create_caam_req_fq() doesn't return NULL pointers so there is no need to
> check. The NULL checks are problematic because it's hard to say how a
> NULL return should be handled, so removing the checks is a nice cleanup.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter
> On Monday, April 1, 2019 10:04 AM, Vitaly Chikunov wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Can you elaborate on why you want to use Streebog? When we added
> > > Speck, we explained in great detail why it was useful from a
> > > technical perspective (before Adiantum was ready). I don't see any such
> explanation
On Monday, April 1, 2019 10:04 AM, Vitaly Chikunov wrote:
> >
> > Can you elaborate on why you want to use Streebog? When we added Speck, we
> > explained in great detail why it was useful from a technical perspective
> > (before
> > Adiantum was ready). I don't see any such explanation for Stre
Eric,
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 03:43:30PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 09:00:41AM +0300, Vitaly Chikunov wrote:
> > Theodore,
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 12:45:50AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > Given the precedent that has been established for removing the SPECK
>
> If the rfc7539 template is instantiated with specific
> implementations, e.g. "rfc7539(chacha20-generic,poly1305-generic)"
> rather than "rfc7539(chacha20,poly1305)", then the implementation
> names end up included in the instance's cra_name. This is incorrect
> [...]
Reviewed-by: Martin Will
Hi,
> The x86_64 implementation of Poly1305 produces the wrong result on
> some inputs because poly1305_4block_avx2() incorrectly assumes that
> when partially reducing the accumulator, the bits carried from limb
> 'd4' to limb 'h0' fit in a 32-bit integer.
> [...] This bug was originally detecte
11 matches
Mail list logo
