On 18/11/2023 18:23, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 2:55 PM Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@xxxxxxxx> wrote:+/** + * struct bpf_crypto_lskcipher_ctx - refcounted BPF sync skcipher context structure + * @tfm: The pointer to crypto_sync_skcipher struct. + * @rcu: The RCU head used to free the crypto context with RCU safety. + * @usage: Object reference counter. When the refcount goes to 0, the + * memory is released back to the BPF allocator, which provides + * RCU safety. + */ +struct bpf_crypto_lskcipher_ctx { + struct crypto_lskcipher *tfm; + struct rcu_head rcu; + refcount_t usage; +}; + +__bpf_kfunc_start_defs(); + +/** + * bpf_crypto_lskcipher_ctx_create() - Create a mutable BPF crypto context.Let's drop 'lskcipher' from the kfunc names and ctx struct. bpf users don't need to know the internal implementation details. bpf_crypto_encrypt/decrypt() is clear enough.
The only reason I added it was the existence of AEAD subset of crypto API. And this subset can also be implemented in bpf later, and there will be inconsistency in naming then if we add aead in future names.
WDYT?
