[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/5 v4] gen: Add ACE acceleration to hash

[Simon Glass]

Hi Kim,

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Kim Phillips <kim.phillips at freescale.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 17:51:00 -0800
> Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>
[snip for Kim]

>> >> Changes sice v3:
>> >>       - Changed command names to lower case in algo struct.
>> >>       - Added generic ace_sha config.
>> >
>> > I wouldn't call "ace" a generic name - crypto units other than
>> > ACE should be able to use this code.
>>
>> I don't really understand this comment. A new CONFIG has been added,
>> and this is specific to that unit. Are you suggesting that it be
>
> right, and that's the problem - it needn't be specific to that unit.

Really? I think here we have a patch for an ACE unit, and currently
the only implementation is in an Exynos chip. It can easily be
extended later when someone else has one.

>
>> CONFIG_EXYNOS_ACE_SHA? Will the ACE unit not appear on any other SOC?
>
> my point is other SoCs can use the same entry in the array - there's
> nothing h/w-vendor or model-specific about it.

OK, know you of such an SOC?

>
> Something like CONFIG_HW_SHA{1,256} ought to do it.
>
>> But I don't think crypto units other than ACE will use the code in
>> this patch - it is intended to implement ACE support, and put it ahead
>> of software support in terms of priority.
>
> the same priority that any h/w accelerated device would get - higher
> than that of software crypto.
>
> Another question for Akshay wrt the timeout (since I never got a
> reply re: documentation):  how can the h/w fault?
>
> Kim
>
> oh, and please stop full-quoting - I'm tired of looking at my
> scrollbar go by with no inline content.

I will try harder. You could look at trying another mailer :-)

>
> Thanks,
>
> Kim
>

Regards,
Simon