| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
The kernel on x86-64 cannot use gcc attribute align to align to
a 16-byte boundary. This patch reverts to the old way of aligning
it by hand.
Fixes: 9ae433bc79f9 ("crypto: chacha20 - convert generic and...")
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
|
|
This converts the ChaCha20 code from a blkcipher to a skcipher, which
is now the preferred way to implement symmetric block and stream ciphers.
This ports the generic and x86 versions at the same time because the
latter reuses routines of the former.
Note that the skcipher_walk() API guarantees that all presented blocks
except the final one are a multiple of the chunk size, so we can simplify
the encrypt() routine somewhat.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
|
|
On 16-byte requests the optimised version is actually slower than
the generic code, so we should simply use that instead.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cheers,
|
|
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1459801503-15600-4-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
|
|
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1459801503-15600-2-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
|
|
Those are stupid and code should use static_cpu_has_safe() or
boot_cpu_has() instead. Kill the least used and unused ones.
The remaining ones need more careful inspection before a conversion can
happen. On the TODO.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1449481182-27541-4-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de
Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
|
|
There are two concepts that have some confusing naming:
1. Extended State Component numbers (currently called
XFEATURE_BIT_*)
2. Extended State Component masks (currently called XSTATE_*)
The numbers are (currently) from 0-9. State component 3 is the
bounds registers for MPX, for instance.
But when we want to enable "state component 3", we go set a bit
in XCR0. The bit we set is 1<<3. We can check to see if a
state component feature is enabled by looking at its bit.
The current 'xfeature_bit's are at best xfeature bit _numbers_.
Calling them bits is at best inconsistent with ending the enum
list with 'XFEATURES_NR_MAX'.
This patch renames the enum to be 'xfeature'. These also
happen to be what the Intel documentation calls a "state
component".
We also want to differentiate these from the "XSTATE_*" macros.
The "XSTATE_*" macros are a mask, and we rename them to match.
These macros are reasonably widely used so this patch is a
wee bit big, but this really is just a rename.
The only non-mechanical part of this is the
s/XSTATE_EXTEND_MASK/XFEATURE_MASK_EXTEND/
We need a better name for it, but that's another patch.
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: dave@sr71.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150902233126.38653250@viggo.jf.intel.com
[ Ported to v4.3-rc1. ]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
|
|
Extends the x86_64 ChaCha20 implementation by a function processing eight
ChaCha20 blocks in parallel using AVX2.
For large messages, throughput increases by ~55-70% compared to four block
SSSE3:
testing speed of chacha20 (chacha20-simd) encryption
test 0 (256 bit key, 16 byte blocks): 42249230 operations in 10 seconds (675987680 bytes)
test 1 (256 bit key, 64 byte blocks): 46441641 operations in 10 seconds (2972265024 bytes)
test 2 (256 bit key, 256 byte blocks): 33028112 operations in 10 seconds (8455196672 bytes)
test 3 (256 bit key, 1024 byte blocks): 11568759 operations in 10 seconds (11846409216 bytes)
test 4 (256 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 1448761 operations in 10 seconds (11868250112 bytes)
testing speed of chacha20 (chacha20-simd) encryption
test 0 (256 bit key, 16 byte blocks): 41999675 operations in 10 seconds (671994800 bytes)
test 1 (256 bit key, 64 byte blocks): 45805908 operations in 10 seconds (2931578112 bytes)
test 2 (256 bit key, 256 byte blocks): 32814947 operations in 10 seconds (8400626432 bytes)
test 3 (256 bit key, 1024 byte blocks): 19777167 operations in 10 seconds (20251819008 bytes)
test 4 (256 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 2279321 operations in 10 seconds (18672197632 bytes)
Benchmark results from a Core i5-4670T.
Signed-off-by: Martin Willi <martin@strongswan.org>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
|
|
Extends the x86_64 SSSE3 ChaCha20 implementation by a function processing
four ChaCha20 blocks in parallel. This avoids the word shuffling needed
in the single block variant, further increasing throughput.
For large messages, throughput increases by ~110% compared to single block
SSSE3:
testing speed of chacha20 (chacha20-simd) encryption
test 0 (256 bit key, 16 byte blocks): 43141886 operations in 10 seconds (690270176 bytes)
test 1 (256 bit key, 64 byte blocks): 46845874 operations in 10 seconds (2998135936 bytes)
test 2 (256 bit key, 256 byte blocks): 18458512 operations in 10 seconds (4725379072 bytes)
test 3 (256 bit key, 1024 byte blocks): 5360533 operations in 10 seconds (5489185792 bytes)
test 4 (256 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 692846 operations in 10 seconds (5675794432 bytes)
testing speed of chacha20 (chacha20-simd) encryption
test 0 (256 bit key, 16 byte blocks): 42249230 operations in 10 seconds (675987680 bytes)
test 1 (256 bit key, 64 byte blocks): 46441641 operations in 10 seconds (2972265024 bytes)
test 2 (256 bit key, 256 byte blocks): 33028112 operations in 10 seconds (8455196672 bytes)
test 3 (256 bit key, 1024 byte blocks): 11568759 operations in 10 seconds (11846409216 bytes)
test 4 (256 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 1448761 operations in 10 seconds (11868250112 bytes)
Benchmark results from a Core i5-4670T.
Signed-off-by: Martin Willi <martin@strongswan.org>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
|
|
Implements an x86_64 assembler driver for the ChaCha20 stream cipher. This
single block variant works on a single state matrix using SSE instructions.
It requires SSSE3 due the use of pshufb for efficient 8/16-bit rotate
operations.
For large messages, throughput increases by ~65% compared to
chacha20-generic:
testing speed of chacha20 (chacha20-generic) encryption
test 0 (256 bit key, 16 byte blocks): 45089207 operations in 10 seconds (721427312 bytes)
test 1 (256 bit key, 64 byte blocks): 43839521 operations in 10 seconds (2805729344 bytes)
test 2 (256 bit key, 256 byte blocks): 12702056 operations in 10 seconds (3251726336 bytes)
test 3 (256 bit key, 1024 byte blocks): 3371173 operations in 10 seconds (3452081152 bytes)
test 4 (256 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 422468 operations in 10 seconds (3460857856 bytes)
testing speed of chacha20 (chacha20-simd) encryption
test 0 (256 bit key, 16 byte blocks): 43141886 operations in 10 seconds (690270176 bytes)
test 1 (256 bit key, 64 byte blocks): 46845874 operations in 10 seconds (2998135936 bytes)
test 2 (256 bit key, 256 byte blocks): 18458512 operations in 10 seconds (4725379072 bytes)
test 3 (256 bit key, 1024 byte blocks): 5360533 operations in 10 seconds (5489185792 bytes)
test 4 (256 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 692846 operations in 10 seconds (5675794432 bytes)
Benchmark results from a Core i5-4670T.
Signed-off-by: Martin Willi <martin@strongswan.org>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
|
