| Message ID | 20211220092318.5793-2-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 96ede30f4b172ab6c83789f6bb420b3c3c029653 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Remove duplicate context init function for sha algorithm | expand |
Hi Tianjia, On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 8:25 PM Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > crypto_sha256_init() and sha256_base_init() are the same repeated > implementations, remove the crypto_sha256_init() in generic > implementation, sha224 is the same process. > > Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > crypto/sha256_generic.c | 16 ++-------------- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/crypto/sha256_generic.c b/crypto/sha256_generic.c > index 3b377197236e..bf147b01e313 100644 > --- a/crypto/sha256_generic.c > +++ b/crypto/sha256_generic.c > @@ -72,7 +60,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(crypto_sha256_finup); > > static struct shash_alg sha256_algs[2] = { { > .digestsize = SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE, > - .init = crypto_sha256_init, > + .init = sha256_base_init, > .update = crypto_sha256_update, > .final = crypto_sha256_final, > .finup = crypto_sha256_finup, > @@ -86,7 +74,7 @@ static struct shash_alg sha256_algs[2] = { { > } > }, { > .digestsize = SHA224_DIGEST_SIZE, > - .init = crypto_sha224_init, > + .init = sha224_base_init, > .update = crypto_sha256_update, > .final = crypto_sha256_final, > .finup = crypto_sha256_finup, Aren't these two functions defined as static inline functions? It appears that these crypto_ wrappers were added so there's "actual" referenceable functions for these structs. Did this actually compile? Thanks,
Hi Julian, On 12/23/21 6:35 AM, Julian Calaby wrote: > Hi Tianjia, > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 8:25 PM Tianjia Zhang > <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >> >> crypto_sha256_init() and sha256_base_init() are the same repeated >> implementations, remove the crypto_sha256_init() in generic >> implementation, sha224 is the same process. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> >> --- >> crypto/sha256_generic.c | 16 ++-------------- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/crypto/sha256_generic.c b/crypto/sha256_generic.c >> index 3b377197236e..bf147b01e313 100644 >> --- a/crypto/sha256_generic.c >> +++ b/crypto/sha256_generic.c >> @@ -72,7 +60,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(crypto_sha256_finup); >> >> static struct shash_alg sha256_algs[2] = { { >> .digestsize = SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE, >> - .init = crypto_sha256_init, >> + .init = sha256_base_init, >> .update = crypto_sha256_update, >> .final = crypto_sha256_final, >> .finup = crypto_sha256_finup, >> @@ -86,7 +74,7 @@ static struct shash_alg sha256_algs[2] = { { >> } >> }, { >> .digestsize = SHA224_DIGEST_SIZE, >> - .init = crypto_sha224_init, >> + .init = sha224_base_init, >> .update = crypto_sha256_update, >> .final = crypto_sha256_final, >> .finup = crypto_sha256_finup, > > Aren't these two functions defined as static inline functions? It > appears that these crypto_ wrappers were added so there's "actual" > referenceable functions for these structs. > > Did this actually compile? > > Thanks, > Judging from the compilation results, there is really no difference, but the modification made by this patch is still necessary, because crypto_sha256_init() wrapper and sha256_base_init() are two completely duplicate functions. Best regards, Tianjia
diff --git a/crypto/sha256_generic.c b/crypto/sha256_generic.c index 3b377197236e..bf147b01e313 100644 --- a/crypto/sha256_generic.c +++ b/crypto/sha256_generic.c @@ -33,18 +33,6 @@ const u8 sha256_zero_message_hash[SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE] = { }; EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sha256_zero_message_hash); -static int crypto_sha256_init(struct shash_desc *desc) -{ - sha256_init(shash_desc_ctx(desc)); - return 0; -} - -static int crypto_sha224_init(struct shash_desc *desc) -{ - sha224_init(shash_desc_ctx(desc)); - return 0; -} - int crypto_sha256_update(struct shash_desc *desc, const u8 *data, unsigned int len) { @@ -72,7 +60,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(crypto_sha256_finup); static struct shash_alg sha256_algs[2] = { { .digestsize = SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE, - .init = crypto_sha256_init, + .init = sha256_base_init, .update = crypto_sha256_update, .final = crypto_sha256_final, .finup = crypto_sha256_finup, @@ -86,7 +74,7 @@ static struct shash_alg sha256_algs[2] = { { } }, { .digestsize = SHA224_DIGEST_SIZE, - .init = crypto_sha224_init, + .init = sha224_base_init, .update = crypto_sha256_update, .final = crypto_sha256_final, .finup = crypto_sha256_finup,
crypto_sha256_init() and sha256_base_init() are the same repeated implementations, remove the crypto_sha256_init() in generic implementation, sha224 is the same process. Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> --- crypto/sha256_generic.c | 16 ++-------------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)