Hi!
On 06/04/17 10:15, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:16:29PM +0100, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
>> This is a regression caused by 856e3f4092
>> ("crypto: seqiv - Add support for new AEAD interface")
>>
>> As I've said above, I can offer one of the two solutions, which patch should I send?
>> Or do you see any better alternatives?
> Here is a series of patches which should fix the problem.
>
> The first three patches prepare the user-space interfaces to deal
> with longer names. The final patch extends it.
>
> Note that with crypto_user I haven't actually extended it to
> configure longer names. It'll only be able to configure names
> less than 64 bytes. However, it should be able to dump/read
> algorithms with longer names, albeit the name will be truncated
> to 64 bytes length.
>
> Steffen, when convenient could you look into extending the crypto
> user interface to handle longer names (preferably arbitraty length
> since netlink should be able to deal with that)?
>
> Likewise xfrm is still fixed to 64 bytes long. But this should
> be OK as the problematic case only arises with IV generators for
> now and we do not allow IV generators to be specified through xfrm.
>
> af_alg on the other hand now allows arbitrarily long names.
I'm not sure about patch 2 (as I've replied separately), but I've applied
and tested the whole series and it at least solves the original problem
with long algorithm name.
> As the final patch depends on all three it would be easiest if
> we pushed the xfrm patch through the crypto tree. Steffen/David?
--
Best regards,
Alexander Sverdlin.
