Hi,
On Thu, 16 Sept 2021 at 09:43, Alex G. mr.nuke.me@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On 7/29/21 8:08 PM, Chia-Wei Wang wrote:
Add UCLASS_HASH for hash driver development. Thus the hash drivers (SW or HW-accelerated) can be developed in the DM-based fashion.
Software hashing implementations are shared tightly with host tools. With DM, there's no opportunity for code sharing with host tools. The design question that I have is "do we want to DM hashes, or do we want to DM hardware accelerators for hashes?"
I did some parallel work expose remaining hash algos via hash_lookup_algo() and hash_progressive_lookup_algo().
Signed-off-by: Chia-Wei Wang chiawei_wang@aspeedtech.com
drivers/crypto/Kconfig | 2 + drivers/crypto/Makefile | 1 + drivers/crypto/hash/Kconfig | 5 ++ drivers/crypto/hash/Makefile | 5 ++ drivers/crypto/hash/hash-uclass.c | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/dm/uclass-id.h | 1 + include/u-boot/hash.h | 61 +++++++++++++++ 7 files changed, 196 insertions(+) create mode 100644 drivers/crypto/hash/Kconfig create mode 100644 drivers/crypto/hash/Makefile create mode 100644 drivers/crypto/hash/hash-uclass.c create mode 100644 include/u-boot/hash.h
diff --git a/drivers/crypto/Kconfig b/drivers/crypto/Kconfig index 1ea116be75..0082177c21 100644 --- a/drivers/crypto/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/crypto/Kconfig @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ menu "Hardware crypto devices"
+source drivers/crypto/hash/Kconfig
Hashes are useful outside of cryptographic functions, so it seems odd to merge them in crypto. For example, CRC32 is not a hash useful in crypto, but otherwise widely used in u-boot.
Are you syching to move this to drivers/hash ? I feel that hashing is close enough to crypto that it might not be worth having a new 'top-level' driver directory.
Some might say that md5 is in the same board (not useful for crypto) but it used to be. Similarly, sha1 is fading away.
[snip]
diff --git a/drivers/crypto/hash/hash-uclass.c b/drivers/crypto/hash/hash-uclass.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..446eb9e56a --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/crypto/hash/hash-uclass.c @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ +/*
- Copyright (c) 2021 ASPEED Technology Inc.
- Author: ChiaWei Wang chiawei_wang@aspeedtech.com
- */
+#define LOG_CATEGORY UCLASS_HASH
+#include <common.h> +#include <dm.h> +#include <asm/global_data.h> +#include <u-boot/hash.h> +#include <errno.h> +#include <fdtdec.h> +#include <malloc.h> +#include <asm/io.h> +#include <linux/list.h>
+struct hash_info {
char *name;uint32_t digest_size;+};
+static const struct hash_info hash_info[HASH_ALGO_NUM] = {
[HASH_ALGO_CRC16_CCITT] = { "crc16-ccitt", 2 },[HASH_ALGO_CRC32] = { "crc32", 4 },[HASH_ALGO_MD5] = { "md5", 16 },[HASH_ALGO_SHA1] = { "sha1", 20 },[HASH_ALGO_SHA256] = { "sha256", 32 },[HASH_ALGO_SHA384] = { "sha384", 48 },[HASH_ALGO_SHA512] = { "sha512", 64},+};
It seems a step backwards to have to enum {} our hash algos, since we already identify them by their strings (e.g. "sha256"). and then associated ops structure. The
+enum HASH_ALGO hash_algo_lookup_by_name(const char *name)
string -> hash_lookup_algo() -> ops structIs the current way to do things. hash_algo_lookup_by_name() does the roundabout through an enum. That doesn't make sense to me.
Actually I'd like to see an enum to describe these, since looking up a string is less efficient in a bootloader. So some way of doing that seems good to me.
Of course it means we need a global list of this algos in a header file and each driver needs to indicate which one(s) it supports.
Regards, Simon