On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:01:58AM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > Pass the flag CRYPTO_ALG_ALLOCATES_MEMORY down through the crypto API. > > Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > crypto/adiantum.c | 3 ++- > crypto/authenc.c | 5 +++-- > crypto/authencesn.c | 5 +++-- > crypto/ccm.c | 7 ++++--- > crypto/chacha20poly1305.c | 5 +++-- > crypto/cryptd.c | 7 +++++-- > crypto/ctr.c | 3 ++- > crypto/cts.c | 5 +++-- > crypto/essiv.c | 5 +++-- > crypto/gcm.c | 15 +++++++++------ > crypto/geniv.c | 3 ++- > crypto/lrw.c | 5 +++-- > crypto/rsa-pkcs1pad.c | 5 +++-- > crypto/xts.c | 2 +- > include/crypto/algapi.h | 9 +++++++++ > 15 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > Index: linux-2.6/crypto/authenc.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.orig/crypto/authenc.c > +++ linux-2.6/crypto/authenc.c > @@ -388,7 +388,8 @@ static int crypto_authenc_create(struct > if ((algt->type ^ CRYPTO_ALG_TYPE_AEAD) & algt->mask) > return -EINVAL; > > - mask = crypto_requires_sync(algt->type, algt->mask); > + mask = crypto_requires_sync(algt->type, algt->mask) | > + crypto_requires_nomem(algt->type, algt->mask); > > inst = kzalloc(sizeof(*inst) + sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!inst) > @@ -424,7 +425,7 @@ static int crypto_authenc_create(struct > goto err_free_inst; > > inst->alg.base.cra_flags = (auth_base->cra_flags | > - enc->base.cra_flags) & CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC; > + enc->base.cra_flags) & (CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC | CRYPTO_ALG_ALLOCATES_MEMORY); ASYNC and ALLOCATES_MEMORY are both handled the same way. They're both "inherited" from inner algorithms to the template instance. And if someone requests that one of these flags be clear when instantiating a template, then we have to honor the same for the inner algorithms too. So, shouldn't we define something like crypto_algt_mask() and CRYPTO_ALG_INHERITED_FLAGS and make them handle both ASYNC and ALLOCATES_MEMORY, rather than explicitly handling each of these flags everywhere again? - Eric
