On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 17:24, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi All, > > Here is v2 of my patch series refactoring the current 2 separate SHA256 > C implementations into 1 and put it into a separate library. > > There are 3 reasons for this: > > 1) Remove the code duplication of having 2 separate implementations > > 2) Offer a separate library SHA256 implementation which can be used > without having to call crypto_alloc_shash first. This is especially > useful for use during early boot when crypto_alloc_shash does not > work yet. > > 3) Having the purgatory code using the same code as the crypto subsys means > that the purgratory code will be tested by the crypto subsys selftests. > > This has been tested on x86, including checking that kecec still works. > > This has NOT been tested on s390, if someone with access to s390 can > test that things still build with this series applied and that > kexec still works, that would be great. > > Changes in v2: > - Use put_unaligned_be32 to store the hash to allow callers to use an > unaligned buffer for storing the hash > - Add a comment to include/crypto/sha256.h explaining that these functions > now may be used outside of the purgatory too (and that using the crypto > API instead is preferred) > - Add sha224 support to the lib/crypto/sha256 library code > - Make crypto/sha256_generic.c not only use sha256_transform from > lib/crypto/sha256.c but also switch it to using sha256_init, sha256_update > and sha256_final from there so that the crypto subsys selftests fully test > the lib/crypto/sha256.c implementation > This looks fine to me, although I agree with Eric's feedback regarding further cleanups. Also, now that we have a C library, I'd like to drop the dependency of the mips and x86 sha256 algo implementations up sha256_generic.c, and use the library directly instead (so that sha256-generic is no longer needed on x86 or mips)
