[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [mac80211] BUG_ON with current -git (4.8.0-11417-g24532f7)
On 14 October 2016 at 09:28, Johannes Berg <> wrote:
>> 1. revert that patch (doing so would need some major adjustments now,
>> since it's pretty old and a number of new things were added in the
>> meantime)
> This it will have to be, I guess.
>> 2. allocate a per-CPU buffer for all the things that we put on the
>> stack and use in SG lists, those are:
>> * CCM/GCM: AAD (32B), B_0/J_0 (16B)
>> * GMAC: AAD (20B), zero (16B)
>> * (not sure why CMAC isn't using this API, but it would be like GMAC)
> This doesn't work - I tried to move the mac80211 buffers, but because
> we also put the struct aead_request on the stack, and crypto_ccm has
> the "odata" in there, and we can't separate the odata from that struct,
> we'd have to also put that into a per-CPU buffer, but it's very big -
> 456 bytes for CCM, didn't measure the others but I'd expect them to be
> larger, if different.
> I don't think we can allocate half a kb for each CPU just to be able to
> possibly use the acceleration here. We can't even make that conditional
> on not having hardware crypto in the wifi NIC because drivers are
> always allowed to pass undecrypted frames, regardless of whether or not
> HW crypto was attempted, so we don't know upfront if we'll have to
> decrypt anything in software...
> Given that, I think we have had a bug in here basically since Ard's
> patch, we never should've put these structs on the stack. Herbert, you
> also touched this later and converted the API usage, did you see the
> way the stack is used here and think it should be OK, or did you simply
> not realize that?
> Ard, are you able to help out working on a revert of your patch? That
> would require also reverting a number of other patches (various fixes,
> API adjustments, etc. to the AEAD usage), but the more complicated part
> is that in the meantime Jouni introduced GCMP and CCMP-256, both of
> which we of course need to retain.

I am missing some context here, but could you explain what exactly is
the problem here?

Look at this code

struct scatterlist sg[3];

char aead_req_data[sizeof(struct aead_request) +
__aligned(__alignof__(struct aead_request));
struct aead_request *aead_req = (void *) aead_req_data;

memset(aead_req, 0, sizeof(aead_req_data));

sg_init_table(sg, 3);
sg_set_buf(&sg[0], &aad[2], be16_to_cpup((__be16 *)aad));
sg_set_buf(&sg[1], data, data_len);
sg_set_buf(&sg[2], mic, mic_len);

aead_request_set_tfm(aead_req, tfm);
aead_request_set_crypt(aead_req, sg, sg, data_len, b_0);
aead_request_set_ad(aead_req, sg[0].length);

I assume the stack buffer itself is not the problem here, but aad,
which is allocated on the stack one frame up.
Do we really need to revert the whole patch to fix that?

 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-14 10:40    [W:0.058 / U:0.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site