From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
To: "Power, Ciara" <ciara.power@intel.com>
Cc: "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>,
"De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>,
"Ji, Kai" <kai.ji@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 22.11] crypto/ipsec_mb: fix incorrectly setting cipher keys
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 10:22:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMw=ZnR=oS_jWXbSMPio_JwFmeO+ZfqKHzP2Ri1L9LPHp3fkxQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SN7PR11MB7639BDC5CA4D3B8EAA719977E6002@SN7PR11MB7639.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 08:17, Power, Ciara <ciara.power@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Luca,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Luca Boccassi <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Friday, April 5, 2024 3:44 PM
> > To: Power, Ciara <ciara.power@intel.com>
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org; De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>;
> > Ji, Kai <kai.ji@intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 22.11] crypto/ipsec_mb: fix incorrectly setting cipher keys
> >
> > On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 at 11:46, Ciara Power <ciara.power@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The encryption and decryption keys were incorrectly being reset based
> > > on authentication algorithm after already being set earlier in the
> > > code based on cipher algorithm.
> > > In cases when 3DES was used, the keys were being incorrectly
> > > overwritten.
> > >
> > > For CPU path, there is no need to have the keys set for XCBC and CMAC
> > > cases.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 010230a1543b ("crypto/aesni_mb: support Chacha20-Poly1305")
> > > Fixes: b0a37e8cd2ac ("crypto/ipsec_mb: fix cipher key setting")
> > > Fixes: a2c6d3f34f90 ("crypto/aesni_mb: support CPU crypto")
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ciara Power <ciara.power@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > Cc: pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com
> > > ---
> > > drivers/crypto/ipsec_mb/pmd_aesni_mb.c | 14 --------------
> > > 1 file changed, 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > I have already tagged rc1 - is this fixing a regression introduced in
> > rc1 itself? If not, how important is it, could it wait for the next release?
>
> No, it is fixing an issue that existed before 22.11 itself. I have also sent the fix for 21.11 LTS.
> The bug was reported by an external user as it caused seg faults for their algorithm use case, so the sooner the better for fix to be merged.
> Would it be suitable for merge in rc2?
I am not planning an rc2, but if you can confirm you have tested this
patch on top of rc1 on the affected platform then I can merge it for
the final release.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-08 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-05 10:38 Ciara Power
2024-04-05 14:43 ` Luca Boccassi
2024-04-08 7:17 ` Power, Ciara
2024-04-08 9:22 ` Luca Boccassi [this message]
2024-04-10 7:56 ` Power, Ciara
2024-04-10 13:07 ` Luca Boccassi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAMw=ZnR=oS_jWXbSMPio_JwFmeO+ZfqKHzP2Ri1L9LPHp3fkxQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=bluca@debian.org \
--cc=ciara.power@intel.com \
--cc=kai.ji@intel.com \
--cc=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).