Re: [PATCH 0/5] Support Argon2 KDF in LUKS2

[Patrick Steinhardt]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:42:59PM +0100, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 08:47:49AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:53:59PM +0100, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> > > >       GRUB's codebase. This included both stripping off unneeded
> > > >       functionality as well as converting the code to use our own coding
> > >
> > > Stripping unneeded functionality is OK. However, I think that it does
> > > not make sense to convert coding style to the GRUB one. Especially if we
> > > do not do that for other modules. So, I would leave coding style in
> > > Argon2 module as is and save your precious minutes for something more
> > > productive... ;-)
> >
> >
> > Fair enough, I'll send out a v2 with the original coding style. I
> > thought as much when I was ready with v1, but was too lazy to do the
> > work and change back the coding style.
> >
> > Anyway, to save myself another roundtrip: would you prefer to merge
> > Argon2 functionality into a single file like I've done it right now or
> > to retain the original set of files? The reason why I've opted for the
> > latter is mainly to be able to annotate more functions as static.
> 
> I think that you should retain original set of files. And please add
> a description to the docs/grub-dev.texi how to update Argon2 lib in
> the future.
> 
> Daniel

In the ideal case, we'd just compile Argon2 with the POSIX compat layer
so that we wouldn't need to modify most of the types and functions used
by it, like uint32, malloc, etc. As a result, libgrubkern.a would grow a
dependency on C{,PP}FLAGS_POSIX, though. I did notice compilation errors
in other modules when trying that, so my question is which path to go:
fix resulting incompatibilities when adding POSIX includes or just
replace types and function calls in Argon2 code?

Patrick

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature