On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 03:16:53PM +0800, Jerry Shih wrote: > On Nov 28, 2023, at 12:12, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 03:06:59PM +0800, Jerry Shih wrote: > >> +/* > >> + * sha256 using zvkb and zvknha/b vector crypto extension > >> + * > >> + * This asm function will just take the first 256-bit as the sha256 state from > >> + * the pointer to `struct sha256_state`. > >> + */ > >> +asmlinkage void > >> +sha256_block_data_order_zvkb_zvknha_or_zvknhb(struct sha256_state *digest, > >> + const u8 *data, int num_blks); > > > > The SHA-2 and SM3 assembly functions are potentially being called using indirect > > calls, depending on whether the compiler optimizes out the indirect call that > > exists in the code or not. These assembly functions also are not defined using > > SYM_TYPED_FUNC_START. This is not compatible with Control Flow Integrity > > (CONFIG_CFI_CLANG); these indirect calls might generate CFI failures. > > > > I recommend using wrapper functions to avoid this issue, like what is done in > > arch/arm64/crypto/sha2-ce-glue.c. > > > > - Eric > > Here is the previous review comment for the assembly function wrapper: > > > +asmlinkage void sha256_block_data_order_zvbb_zvknha(u32 *digest, const void *data, > > > + unsigned int num_blks); > > > + > > > +static void __sha256_block_data_order(struct sha256_state *sst, u8 const *src, > > > + int blocks) > > > +{ > > > + sha256_block_data_order_zvbb_zvknha(sst->state, src, blocks); > > > +} > > Having a double-underscored function wrap around a non-underscored one like this > > isn't conventional for Linux kernel code. IIRC some of the other crypto code > > happens to do this, but it really is supposed to be the other way around. > > > > I think you should just declare the assembly function to take a 'struct > > sha256_state', with a comment mentioning that only the 'u32 state[8]' at the > > beginning is actually used. That's what arch/x86/crypto/sha256_ssse3_glue.c > > does, for example. Then, __sha256_block_data_order() would be unneeded. > > Do you mean that we need the wrapper functions back for both SHA-* and SM3? > If yes, we also don't need to check the state offset like: > BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct sha256_state, state) != 0); > > Could we just use the `SYM_TYPED_FUNC_START` in asm directly without the > wrappers? Sorry, I forgot that I had recommended against wrapper functions earlier. I didn't realize that SYM_TYPED_FUNC_START was missing. Yes, you can also do it without wrapper functions if you add SYM_TYPED_FUNC_START to the assembly. - Eric