Am Donnerstag, 9. Juli 2015, 12:19:53 schrieb Stephan Mueller: Hi, > Am Donnerstag, 9. Juli 2015, 07:13:30 schrieb Herbert Xu: > > Hi Herbert, > > >Hi: > > > >This series attempts to phase out the recently introduced seqniv > >generator. The reason is that the logic of seqniv should not be > >implemented at the IV generator layer. Having the IV skipping > >logic in seqniv means that you cannot perform encryption without > >doing IV generation. > > > >In fact moving the IV skipping logic out of seqniv and into the > >underlying rfcXXXX (e.g., rfc4106) template allows optimisations > >to be made as the underlying code can often skip the IV in a more > >efficient manner. > > > >Unfortunately we've already begun the conversion process so this > >series adds a new flag CRYPTO_ALG_AEAD_NEW to indicate whether > >a given algorithm has been converted to the new interface where > >IV skipping is done outside of the IV generator. This flag can > >be removed once the conversion is complete. > > All GCM implementations available on recent Intel systems successfully > tested (i.e NX and CAAM not tested). > > Just to clarify: from a caller's perspective, using > seqniv(rfc4106(gcm(aes))) is still the right invocation? Or shall I now use > seqiv? Actually, I found a problem that I have overlooked initally: rfc4106-gcm-aesni causes a problem. For encryption/decryption with the same tests for other rfc4106 implementations, I get an EINVAL. > > >Cheers, > > 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 -- 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
