On 30 March 2015 at 23:10, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof at suse.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 10:03:34AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 21:42 +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >> > This would require generating two binary files and supporting that. This was >> > never done. We could also try to somehow mesh both versions together with one >> > larger file that has both and try to remain compatible. That's the ideal >> > solution IMHO. >> >> Given the file format, I don't think this will be possible. >> >> > Instead of sticking to CRDA updates to rely on this for support what we really >> > need to do is mesh in CRDA support upstream into the kernel since the kernel >> > now supports the cryptographic needs that CRDA had. I was planning on doing >> > this during the upcoming Hackweek at SUSE but if anyone else wants to try that >> > before please feel free. >> >> And given that we want this direction anyway, I'm not sure that the >> multi-file-format CRDA solution will really be economical. >> >> For the kernel, we should probably define an extensible file format >> anyway, and then just do it once. > > Ack. I can try to address both then during Hackweek unless someone wants > to jump on it sooner. > Hello Jean-Pierre, Before this will be ready, you can always chek crda-tiny implementation, where signed db.txt file is used (skiped bin file) - and CAC time works fine. So, you can check this patch: [RFC 2/2] crda: add crda_tiny implementation . BR Janusz
