[PATCH v4 4/4] RISC-V: crypto: add accelerated GCM GHASH implementation

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Mittwoch, 5. April 2023, 17:04:57 CEST schrieb Heiko Stübner:
> Hi again,
> 
> Am Mittwoch, 29. März 2023, 21:20:21 CEST schrieb Heiko Stübner:
> > Am Mittwoch, 29. März 2023, 20:37:16 CEST schrieb Eric Biggers:
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 04:06:42PM +0200, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/crypto/ghash-riscv64-zbc.pl b/arch/riscv/crypto/ghash-riscv64-zbc.pl
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..691231ffa11c
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/crypto/ghash-riscv64-zbc.pl
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,400 @@
> > > > +#! /usr/bin/env perl
> > > > +# Copyright 2022 The OpenSSL Project Authors. All Rights Reserved.
> > > > +#
> > > > +# Licensed under the Apache License 2.0 (the "License").  You may not use
> > > > +# this file except in compliance with the License.  You can obtain a copy
> > > > +# in the file LICENSE in the source distribution or at
> > > > +# https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html
> > > 
> > > My understanding is that code that is licensed under (only) the Apache License
> > > 2.0 cannot be included in GPLv2 programs such as the Linux kernel.
> > 
> > Thanks a lot for pointing out that possible licensing issue.
> > It seems I'm not touching enough non-GPL code most days to keep that
> > in the front of my mind :-) .
> > 
> > 
> > > Is this code written by Andy Polyakov?  What's been done in the past for his
> > > code is that he re-releases it in CRYPTOGAMS at
> > > https://github.com/dot-asm/cryptogams with a Linux kernel compatible license.
> > > The Linux kernel then takes the code from there instead of from OpenSSL.
> > 
> > The git log for the original openssl ".pl" thankfully only contains
> > @vrull.eu addresses, so getting this in a compatible license shouldn't be
> > overly hard - I hope.
> 
> just to follow up with the current state.
> 
> We're currently trying to see if openSSL allows us to dual-license the
> files inside openssl itself [0]. It looks a bit like we're the first to
> try something like this, so the decision gets to be made by the OMC.

Openssl merged the dual-licensing approach.
So we get Apache + BSD licensed code which should be ok to simply merge
over without needing additional repositories and also allows to import
future improvements on the openssl side.


> [0] https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20649