On 3 October 2018 at 08:12, Eric Biggers [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 04:56:10PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:

quoted

These NEON and non-NEON implementations come from Andy Polyakov's
implementation, and are included here in raw form without modification,
so that subsequent commits that fix these up for the kernel can see how
it has changed. This awkward commit splitting has been requested for the
ARM[64] implementations in particular.

"This awkward commit splitting"

Seriously?!?

So you really think it is fine to import huge chunks of code like this
from other projects without keeping track of the local changes?

quoted

While this is CRYPTOGAMS code, the originating code for this happens to
be the same as OpenSSL's commit 5bb1cd2292b388263a0cc05392bb99141212aa53

Sorry to ruin the fun, but actually there are no Poly1305 implementations in
CRYPTOGAMS (https://github.com/dot-asm/cryptogams).  Nor are there any ChaCha20
implementations.

So was this code taken directly from the OpenSSL project then? If so,
why do the commit messages claim otherwise?

Andy P., can you please add your Poly1305 and ChaCha20 implementations to the
CRYPTOGAMS repository, so that they have a clear kernel-compatible license?

It would be great if you'd include a kernel-compatible license directly in the
versions in the OpenSSL tree too...

Yes please.