Hi Bob, On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 7:14 PM Bob Wolff <bob.wolf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Any thoughts on how to proceed with the issue mentioned about tinycrypt > warnings/checks? > > Also, I'd like your advice - I was thinking for the larger patch that I'd > do it in two commits. The first would be the addition of the tinycrypt > files and the second is the actual changes and additions to support ecdsa > verification. I doubt that's controversial. However when I run a trial > `patman` against the tinycrypt commit, I geta huge number of issues: > *checkpatch.pl <http://checkpatch.pl> found 186 error(s), 380 > warning(s), 481 checks(s)* > > What's your advice on this? I would tend to think we'd want to /not/ change > the source files directly for such purposes so that updates could be > brought in with greater ease.
I didn't form any opinion on that, hence asking. Why not to backport existing ECC/ECDSA implementation from Linux kernel (crypto/ecc.c, ./crypto/ecdsa.c), like it was already done for RSA, X509 parser, ASN.1 decoder. Pulling the whole library into the U-Boot source tree only just for ECDSA is a bit overkill IMO. > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 3:07 PM Bob Wolff <bob.wolf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Peter, > > Thanks for helping lead me down the right path here. > > > > WRT tinycrypt, the license is quite permissive. > > https://github.com/intel/tinycrypt > > > > Also, I'd like your advice - I was thinking for the larger patch that I'd > > do it in two commits. The first would be the addition of the tinycrypt > > files and the second is the actual changes and additions to support ecdsa > > verification. I doubt that's controversial. However when I run a trial > > `patman` against the tinycrypt commit, I geta huge number of issues: > > *checkpatch.pl <http://checkpatch.pl> found 186 error(s), 380 > > warning(s), 481 checks(s)* > > > > What's your advice on this? I would tend to think we'd want to /not/ > > change the source files directly for such purposes so that updates could be > > brought in with greater ease. > > > > Let me know your thoughts. > > > > Thanks, > > Bob Wolff > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 6:03 AM Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024, 11:30 Bob Wolff, <bob.wolf...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi there, > >>> I have two separate but related pull requests I'd like to contribute. > >>> They > >>> both have to do with ECDSA support. > >>> - The simple one is a lack of null-pointer check that can cause a crash > >>> in > >>> certain situations. Easy peasy. > >>> > >> > >> Just send that one on it's own > >> > >> - The less simple one (and hopefully not too controversial) adds an ecdsa > >>> verify driver (UCLASS_ECDSA) which utilizes tinycrypt to do the crypto > >>> work. > >>> > >> > >> Do we already use tiny crypt in the project, if not things like license > >> need to be taken into account in the context of the GPLv2 > >> > >> Please advise on how best to proceed. Happy to work within the confines of > >>> what works best for the larger group. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Bob Wolff > >>> > >> -- Best regards - Freundliche Grüsse - Meilleures salutations Igor Opaniuk Senior Software Engineer, Embedded & Security E: igor.opan...@foundries.io W: www.foundries.io
