* Herbert Xu | 2008-03-05 19:16:02 [+0800]:
>> +struct sinfo {
>> + be128 t;
>> + struct crypto_tfm *tfm;
>> + void (*fn)(struct crypto_tfm *, u8 *, const u8 *);
>> +};
>> +
>> struct priv {
>> + /* s.t being the first member in this struct enforces proper alignment
>> + * required by the underlying cipher without explicit knowing the it.
>> + */
>> + struct sinfo s;
>
>tfm objects should be reentrant so you can't store any per-op
>info in the context structure.
I could also do kmalloc(), align() and kfree() after encrypt but this
was faster.
>
>> - tw(crypto_cipher_tfm(ctx->tweak), (void *)&s.t, w->iv);
>> + tw(crypto_cipher_tfm(ctx->tweak), (void *)&s->t, w->iv);
>
>However, the real question is why do we need this at all? The
>tw argument should be using the proper entry points that do
>copying for you if necessary.
>
>OK, I see that the issue is that we're using cia_encrypt instead
>of cit_encrypt_one. So if we just change that then it should work
>correctly.
I'm not sure if we are allowed to modify the IV or if it should
remain untouched. If it is possible to modify it, I could encrypt it
inplace and save two memcpy().
I will check this tonight.
>
>Cheers,
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
