Hi James, On 2026-08-13T19:58:53, James Hilliard <[email protected]> wrote: > crypto: hash: support hardware-only progressive hashing > > FIT configuration signatures hash multiple discontiguous regions through > the legacy progressive hash interface. This still requires a software > implementation even when image hashes use a driver-model hardware > provider. > > Add provider selection for progressive driver-model hashing and use it > from hash_calculate(). Allow SPL_SHA256_LEGACY to be disabled explicitly, > link the SHA-256 software support only for a selected software backend, > and make legacy fallback paths reject an algorithm whose software > callbacks are absent. > > Extend the hash provider-selection test to cover progressive > initialization.
That seems like a stale comment, at least for this commit. > > This permits SPL to retain SHA-256 FIT support while relying exclusively > on a hardware hash provider. > > Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <[email protected]> > > boot/image-fit.c | 2 +- > common/hash.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++-- > drivers/crypto/hash/hash-uclass.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/u-boot/hash.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ > lib/Makefile | 4 ++-- > lib/hash-checksum.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > lib/mbedtls/Kconfig | 2 +- > 7 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > diff --git a/lib/hash-checksum.c b/lib/hash-checksum.c > @@ -20,13 +22,37 @@ int hash_calculate(const char *name, > + if (!ret) { > + for (i = 0; i < region_count; i++) { > + ret = hash_update(dev, ctx, region[i].data, > + region[i].size); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + } > + > + return hash_finish(dev, ctx, checksum); > + } If hash_update() fails partway through, the provider's ctx is leaked - nothing calls hash_finish() or an equivalent free path. Do you need an explicit teardown on the error exit? Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> Regards, Simon
