| Message ID | 1419334379-32294-9-git-send-email-ruchika.gupta@freescale.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Tom Rini |
| Headers | show |
Hi Ruchika, On 23 December 2014 at 04:32, Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> wrote: > The hash_algo structure has some implementations in which progressive hash > API's are not defined. These are basically the hardware based implementations > of SHA. An API is added to find the algo which has progressive hash API's > defined. This can then be integrated with RSA checksum library which uses > Progressive Hash API's. > > Signed-off-by: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> > CC: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> > --- > Changes in v3 : > Corrected ifdef for SHA1 > > Changes in v2 : > Added commit message > > common/hash.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > include/hash.h | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/common/hash.c b/common/hash.c > index 12d6759..ea1ec60 100644 > --- a/common/hash.c > +++ b/common/hash.c > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ > #include <asm/io.h> > #include <asm/errno.h> > > -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM > +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 I'm still not sure about this. I suspect this will bloat the code for boards that use CONFIG_SHA1 (most) but not CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM. You could check that, but I went through some contortions to make sure that the hash API was not compiled in when not needed. > static int hash_init_sha1(struct hash_algo *algo, void **ctxp) > { > sha1_context *ctx = malloc(sizeof(sha1_context)); > @@ -125,12 +125,7 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > CHUNKSZ_SHA256, > }, > #endif > - /* > - * This is CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM instead of CONFIG_SHA1 since otherwise > - * it bloats the code for boards which use SHA1 but not the 'hash' > - * or 'sha1sum' commands. > - */ This is the comment referring to the above. Is it possible to leave this logic as it is? > -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM > +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 > { > "sha1", > SHA1_SUM_LEN, > @@ -140,7 +135,6 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > hash_update_sha1, > hash_finish_sha1, > }, > -#define MULTI_HASH > #endif > #ifdef CONFIG_SHA256 > { > @@ -152,7 +146,6 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > hash_update_sha256, > hash_finish_sha256, > }, > -#define MULTI_HASH > #endif > { > "crc32", > @@ -165,6 +158,10 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > }, > }; > > +#if defined(CONFIG_SHA256) || defined(CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM) > +#define MULTI_HASH > +#endif > + > #if defined(CONFIG_HASH_VERIFY) || defined(CONFIG_CMD_HASH) > #define MULTI_HASH > #endif > @@ -311,6 +308,24 @@ int hash_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, struct hash_algo **algop) > return -EPROTONOSUPPORT; > } > > +int hash_progressive_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, > + struct hash_algo **algop) > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(hash_algo); i++) { > + if (!strcmp(algo_name, hash_algo[i].name)) { > + if (hash_algo[i].hash_init) { > + *algop = &hash_algo[i]; > + return 0; > + } > + } > + } > + > + debug("Unknown hash algorithm '%s'\n", algo_name); > + return -EPROTONOSUPPORT; > +} > + > void hash_show(struct hash_algo *algo, ulong addr, ulong len, uint8_t *output) > { > int i; > diff --git a/include/hash.h b/include/hash.h > index d8ec4f0..059f84e 100644 > --- a/include/hash.h > +++ b/include/hash.h > @@ -128,6 +128,21 @@ int hash_block(const char *algo_name, const void *data, unsigned int len, > int hash_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, struct hash_algo **algop); > > /** > + * hash_progressive_lookup_algo() - Look up the hash_algo struct with progressive > + * hash support for an algorithm Try to get that on one line if you can. > + * > + * The function returns the pointer to the struct or -EPROTONOSUPPORT if the > + * algorithm is not available with progressive hash support. > + * > + * @algo_name: Hash algorithm to look up > + * @algop: Pointer to the hash_algo struct if found > + * > + * @return 0 if ok, -EPROTONOSUPPORT for an unknown algorithm. > + */ > +int hash_progressive_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, > + struct hash_algo **algop); > + > +/** > * hash_show() - Print out a hash algorithm and value > * > * You will get a message like this (without a newline at the end): > -- > 1.8.1.4 > Regards, Simon
Hi Simon, > -----Original Message----- > From: sjg@google.com [mailto:sjg@google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 6:20 AM > To: Gupta Ruchika-R66431 > Cc: U-Boot Mailing List; Sun York-R58495 > Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] [v3] hash: Add function to find hash_algo struct > with progressive hash > > Hi Ruchika, > > On 23 December 2014 at 04:32, Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> > wrote: > > The hash_algo structure has some implementations in which progressive > > hash API's are not defined. These are basically the hardware based > > implementations of SHA. An API is added to find the algo which has > > progressive hash API's defined. This can then be integrated with RSA > > checksum library which uses Progressive Hash API's. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> > > CC: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> > > --- > > Changes in v3 : > > Corrected ifdef for SHA1 > > > > Changes in v2 : > > Added commit message > > > > common/hash.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- include/hash.h > > | 15 +++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/common/hash.c b/common/hash.c index 12d6759..ea1ec60 > > 100644 > > --- a/common/hash.c > > +++ b/common/hash.c > > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ > > #include <asm/io.h> > > #include <asm/errno.h> > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 > > I'm still not sure about this. I suspect this will bloat the code for boards > that use CONFIG_SHA1 (most) but not CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM. You could check that, > but I went through some contortions to make sure that the hash API was not > compiled in when not needed. Since we will be using this API now in RSA checksum, defining CONFIG_SHA1 should allow the compilation of this structure. Asking user to enable CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM for using rsa-checksum doesn’t look right. Please suggest. > > > static int hash_init_sha1(struct hash_algo *algo, void **ctxp) { > > sha1_context *ctx = malloc(sizeof(sha1_context)); @@ -125,12 > > +125,7 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > > CHUNKSZ_SHA256, > > }, > > #endif > > - /* > > - * This is CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM instead of CONFIG_SHA1 since > otherwise > > - * it bloats the code for boards which use SHA1 but not the 'hash' > > - * or 'sha1sum' commands. > > - */ > > This is the comment referring to the above. > > Is it possible to leave this logic as it is? > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 > > { > > "sha1", > > SHA1_SUM_LEN, > > @@ -140,7 +135,6 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > > hash_update_sha1, > > hash_finish_sha1, > > }, > > -#define MULTI_HASH > > #endif > > #ifdef CONFIG_SHA256 > > { > > @@ -152,7 +146,6 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > > hash_update_sha256, > > hash_finish_sha256, > > }, > > -#define MULTI_HASH > > #endif > > { > > "crc32", > > @@ -165,6 +158,10 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { > > }, > > }; > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_SHA256) || defined(CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM) #define > > +MULTI_HASH #endif > > + > > #if defined(CONFIG_HASH_VERIFY) || defined(CONFIG_CMD_HASH) #define > > MULTI_HASH #endif @@ -311,6 +308,24 @@ int hash_lookup_algo(const > > char *algo_name, struct hash_algo **algop) > > return -EPROTONOSUPPORT; > > } > > > > +int hash_progressive_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, > > + struct hash_algo **algop) { > > + int i; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(hash_algo); i++) { > > + if (!strcmp(algo_name, hash_algo[i].name)) { > > + if (hash_algo[i].hash_init) { > > + *algop = &hash_algo[i]; > > + return 0; > > + } > > + } > > + } > > + > > + debug("Unknown hash algorithm '%s'\n", algo_name); > > + return -EPROTONOSUPPORT; > > +} > > + > > void hash_show(struct hash_algo *algo, ulong addr, ulong len, uint8_t > > *output) { > > int i; > > diff --git a/include/hash.h b/include/hash.h index d8ec4f0..059f84e > > 100644 > > --- a/include/hash.h > > +++ b/include/hash.h > > @@ -128,6 +128,21 @@ int hash_block(const char *algo_name, const void > > *data, unsigned int len, int hash_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, > > struct hash_algo **algop); > > > > /** > > + * hash_progressive_lookup_algo() - Look up the hash_algo struct with > progressive > > + * hash support for an algorithm > > Try to get that on one line if you can. > > > + * > > + * The function returns the pointer to the struct or -EPROTONOSUPPORT > > +if the > > + * algorithm is not available with progressive hash support. > > + * > > + * @algo_name: Hash algorithm to look up > > + * @algop: Pointer to the hash_algo struct if found > > + * > > + * @return 0 if ok, -EPROTONOSUPPORT for an unknown algorithm. > > + */ > > +int hash_progressive_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, > > + struct hash_algo **algop); > > + > > +/** > > * hash_show() - Print out a hash algorithm and value > > * > > * You will get a message like this (without a newline at the end): > > -- > > 1.8.1.4 > > > > Regards, > Simon Regards, Ruchika
+Wolfgang Hi Ruchika, On 29 December 2014 at 00:07, Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sjg@google.com [mailto:sjg@google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass >> Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 6:20 AM >> To: Gupta Ruchika-R66431 >> Cc: U-Boot Mailing List; Sun York-R58495 >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] [v3] hash: Add function to find hash_algo struct >> with progressive hash >> >> Hi Ruchika, >> >> On 23 December 2014 at 04:32, Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> >> wrote: >> > The hash_algo structure has some implementations in which progressive >> > hash API's are not defined. These are basically the hardware based >> > implementations of SHA. An API is added to find the algo which has >> > progressive hash API's defined. This can then be integrated with RSA >> > checksum library which uses Progressive Hash API's. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> >> > CC: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> >> > --- >> > Changes in v3 : >> > Corrected ifdef for SHA1 >> > >> > Changes in v2 : >> > Added commit message >> > >> > common/hash.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- include/hash.h >> > | 15 +++++++++++++++ >> > 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/common/hash.c b/common/hash.c index 12d6759..ea1ec60 >> > 100644 >> > --- a/common/hash.c >> > +++ b/common/hash.c >> > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ >> > #include <asm/io.h> >> > #include <asm/errno.h> >> > >> > -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 >> >> I'm still not sure about this. I suspect this will bloat the code for boards >> that use CONFIG_SHA1 (most) but not CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM. You could check that, >> but I went through some contortions to make sure that the hash API was not >> compiled in when not needed. > > Since we will be using this API now in RSA checksum, defining CONFIG_SHA1 should allow the compilation of this structure. Asking user to enable CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM for using rsa-checksum doesn’t look right. Please suggest. Agreed it doesn't, it was just a code size hack. Wolfgang might be able to chime in with thoughts here (+Cc). But still, do you need to change it? After all, CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM should be a superest for CONFIG_SHA1. [snip] Regards, Simon
Hi Simon, > -----Original Message----- > From: sjg@google.com [mailto:sjg@google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 2:44 AM > To: Gupta Ruchika-R66431 > Cc: U-Boot Mailing List; Sun York-R58495; Wolfgang Denk > Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] [v3] hash: Add function to find hash_algo struct > with progressive hash > > +Wolfgang > > Hi Ruchika, > > On 29 December 2014 at 00:07, Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> > wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: sjg@google.com [mailto:sjg@google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass > >> Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 6:20 AM > >> To: Gupta Ruchika-R66431 > >> Cc: U-Boot Mailing List; Sun York-R58495 > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] [v3] hash: Add function to find hash_algo > >> struct with progressive hash > >> > >> Hi Ruchika, > >> > >> On 23 December 2014 at 04:32, Ruchika Gupta > >> <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> > >> wrote: > >> > The hash_algo structure has some implementations in which > >> > progressive hash API's are not defined. These are basically the > >> > hardware based implementations of SHA. An API is added to find the > >> > algo which has progressive hash API's defined. This can then be > >> > integrated with RSA checksum library which uses Progressive Hash API's. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> > >> > CC: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> > >> > --- > >> > Changes in v3 : > >> > Corrected ifdef for SHA1 > >> > > >> > Changes in v2 : > >> > Added commit message > >> > > >> > common/hash.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > >> > include/hash.h > >> > | 15 +++++++++++++++ > >> > 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >> > > >> > diff --git a/common/hash.c b/common/hash.c index 12d6759..ea1ec60 > >> > 100644 > >> > --- a/common/hash.c > >> > +++ b/common/hash.c > >> > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ > >> > #include <asm/io.h> > >> > #include <asm/errno.h> > >> > > >> > -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM > >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 > >> > >> I'm still not sure about this. I suspect this will bloat the code for > >> boards that use CONFIG_SHA1 (most) but not CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM. You > >> could check that, but I went through some contortions to make sure > >> that the hash API was not compiled in when not needed. > > > > Since we will be using this API now in RSA checksum, defining CONFIG_SHA1 > should allow the compilation of this structure. Asking user to enable > CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM for using rsa-checksum doesn’t look right. Please suggest. > > Agreed it doesn't, it was just a code size hack. Wolfgang might be able to > chime in with thoughts here (+Cc). > > But still, do you need to change it? After all, CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM should be > a superest for CONFIG_SHA1. With CONFIG_FIT_SIGNATURE, CONFIG_SHA1 and CONFIG_SHA256 get automatically defined in include/image.h. I need to use the structure hash_algos to find the functions to be used for algo SHA1. If I leave this as it is, it would mean that I will have to modify include/image.h to define CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM for FIT signatures. I am not sure whether that would be the right thing to do. > > [snip] > > Regards, > Simon Regards, Ruchika
diff --git a/common/hash.c b/common/hash.c index 12d6759..ea1ec60 100644 --- a/common/hash.c +++ b/common/hash.c @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ #include <asm/io.h> #include <asm/errno.h> -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 static int hash_init_sha1(struct hash_algo *algo, void **ctxp) { sha1_context *ctx = malloc(sizeof(sha1_context)); @@ -125,12 +125,7 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { CHUNKSZ_SHA256, }, #endif - /* - * This is CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM instead of CONFIG_SHA1 since otherwise - * it bloats the code for boards which use SHA1 but not the 'hash' - * or 'sha1sum' commands. - */ -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM +#ifdef CONFIG_SHA1 { "sha1", SHA1_SUM_LEN, @@ -140,7 +135,6 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { hash_update_sha1, hash_finish_sha1, }, -#define MULTI_HASH #endif #ifdef CONFIG_SHA256 { @@ -152,7 +146,6 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { hash_update_sha256, hash_finish_sha256, }, -#define MULTI_HASH #endif { "crc32", @@ -165,6 +158,10 @@ static struct hash_algo hash_algo[] = { }, }; +#if defined(CONFIG_SHA256) || defined(CONFIG_CMD_SHA1SUM) +#define MULTI_HASH +#endif + #if defined(CONFIG_HASH_VERIFY) || defined(CONFIG_CMD_HASH) #define MULTI_HASH #endif @@ -311,6 +308,24 @@ int hash_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, struct hash_algo **algop) return -EPROTONOSUPPORT; } +int hash_progressive_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, + struct hash_algo **algop) +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(hash_algo); i++) { + if (!strcmp(algo_name, hash_algo[i].name)) { + if (hash_algo[i].hash_init) { + *algop = &hash_algo[i]; + return 0; + } + } + } + + debug("Unknown hash algorithm '%s'\n", algo_name); + return -EPROTONOSUPPORT; +} + void hash_show(struct hash_algo *algo, ulong addr, ulong len, uint8_t *output) { int i; diff --git a/include/hash.h b/include/hash.h index d8ec4f0..059f84e 100644 --- a/include/hash.h +++ b/include/hash.h @@ -128,6 +128,21 @@ int hash_block(const char *algo_name, const void *data, unsigned int len, int hash_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, struct hash_algo **algop); /** + * hash_progressive_lookup_algo() - Look up the hash_algo struct with progressive + * hash support for an algorithm + * + * The function returns the pointer to the struct or -EPROTONOSUPPORT if the + * algorithm is not available with progressive hash support. + * + * @algo_name: Hash algorithm to look up + * @algop: Pointer to the hash_algo struct if found + * + * @return 0 if ok, -EPROTONOSUPPORT for an unknown algorithm. + */ +int hash_progressive_lookup_algo(const char *algo_name, + struct hash_algo **algop); + +/** * hash_show() - Print out a hash algorithm and value * * You will get a message like this (without a newline at the end):
The hash_algo structure has some implementations in which progressive hash API's are not defined. These are basically the hardware based implementations of SHA. An API is added to find the algo which has progressive hash API's defined. This can then be integrated with RSA checksum library which uses Progressive Hash API's. Signed-off-by: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@freescale.com> CC: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> --- Changes in v3 : Corrected ifdef for SHA1 Changes in v2 : Added commit message common/hash.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- include/hash.h | 15 +++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)