On 5/14/21 3:44 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Alex,
On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 14:38, Alex G. <mr.nuke...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/6/21 9:24 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Add host Kconfigs for FIT_SIGN and RSA_VERIFY. With these we can
use CONFIG_IS_ENABLED() directly in the host build, so drop the
unnecessary indirections IMAGE_ENABLE_SIGN and HOST_RSA_VERIFY.
Also drop FIT_IMAGE_ENABLE_VERIFY which is not actually used.
Leave IMAGE_ENABLE_VERIFY_ECDSA along since this feature is
incomplete and needs to be integrated with RSA.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> ---
(no changes since v1)
common/image-fit.c | 6 +++--- common/image-sig.c | 10
+++++----- include/image.h | 13 ++-----------
include/u-boot/ecdsa.h | 2 +- include/u-boot/rsa.h | 4 ++--
tools/Kconfig | 10 ++++++++++ tools/image-host.c |
4 ++-- 7 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/image-fit.c b/common/image-fit.c index
c13ff6bba24..e81a0858dc1 100644 --- a/common/image-fit.c +++
b/common/image-fit.c @@ -1301,7 +1301,7 @@ int
fit_image_verify_with_data(const void *fit, int image_noffset,
int ret;
/* Verify all required signatures */ - if
(FIT_IMAGE_ENABLE_VERIFY && + if
(CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(RSA_VERIFY) &&
NAK. Having verification depend directly on CONFIG_RSA_VERIFY will
make adding ECDSA support that much more convoluted.
Let me counter-NAK.
The ECDSA needs to be integrated into the RSA stuff, as we have done
with hashing. E.g. CONFIG_VERIFY that enables the feature, with a
driver to select which methods are supported.
Then why not add a CONFIG_(SPL_)VERIFY to this patch instead of
replacing a common define with an algo-secific CONFIG?
I think I mentioned that in the original review.
You did. Integrating ECDSA with RSA is orthogonal to ECDSA verification.
I like the motivation behind this cosmetic series, but it is
creating unnecessary complications to adding the ECDSA features.
"It is relatively straightforward to add new algorithms if required.
[...] If another algorithm is needed (such as DSA) then it can be
placed alongside rsa.c, and its functions added to the table in
image-sig.c also."
That's from doc/uImage.FIT/signature.txt. Seems like we're changing goal
posts as the balls are already in the air. I want to tone down this
series, pick a few patches that I really like, combine them with some of
my changes and submit a co-authored series with the uncontroversial changes.
I posted a parallel series which eliminates IMAGE_ENABLE_VERIFY_ECDSA,
and is far less intrusive. I was already trying to combine it with some
patches in this series. Let's see how that goes
Alex
