Am Montag, 22. Dezember 2014, 22:23:41 schrieb Herbert Xu: Hi Herbert, > On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 11:22:30PM +0100, Stephan Mueller wrote: > > +static inline bool aead_sufficient_data(struct aead_ctx *ctx) > > +{ > > + unsigned as = crypto_aead_authsize(crypto_aead_reqtfm(&ctx- >aead_req)); > > + > > + return (ctx->used >= (ctx->aead_assoclen + ctx->enc ? : as )); > > Is this supposed to be > > return (ctx->used >= (ctx->aead_assoclen + (ctx->enc ?: as))); Thanks, will be fixed in the next iteration > > > +static int aead_recvmsg(struct kiocb *unused, struct socket *sock, > > + struct msghdr *msg, size_t ignored, int flags) > > +{ > > ... > > > + err = -ENOMEM; > > + if (!aead_sufficient_data(ctx)) > > + goto unlock; > > You should just block if there is insufficient input. > I do not concur here due to the following: - the check aead_readable() immediately before this check implements the blocking if we do not have sufficient data *and* more data is to be expected - this very check for aead_sufficient_data() comes into play if the caller does not have more data (i.e. ctx->more is zero). In this case, more data is not to be expected and we cannot wait as this would be a deadlock in user space. -- Ciao Stephan -- 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