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

[Simon Glass]

Hi Kim,

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Kim Phillips
<kim.phillips at freescale.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:53:37 -0700
> Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Kim Phillips <kim.phillips at freescale.com>wrote:
>> > On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 19:11:16 -0800
>> > Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>> > > OK so let's look at adding the hash_register() idea. But not in this
>> > > series. That should come later in a revision of the hash.c
>> > > infrastructure, since it needs to adjust sha1, sha255 and crc32.
>> >
>> > I don't understand: why not s/ace/hw/g in common/ and include/ on
>> > this patchseries, then move straight to the device model at some
>> > later point?  It's a compromise, but it works fine for the time
>> > being - other vendors can add their hash support without having to
>> > touch common code, code size is not affected, etc.
>>
>> Fine with me. The effect is the same - this is just a rename. Should not be
>> done in the ace.h file though, only in the naming of the functions called
>> from hash.c, right?
>
> the ace_sha_hash_digest() declaration should be removed from
> ace_sha.h (it's only needed by the driver, which is ok without it
> being there).  ACE_SHA_TYPE_SHA* definitions belong in the driver
> too - they're ACE h/w-specific.  Rename the filename ace_sha.h to
> hw_sha.h, and all remaining ACE references contained in it.

Maybe I misunderstand - are you saying that that all the ACE symbols
in the driver should be renamed to hw? That doesn't make a lot of
sense to me - why is this needed?
>
> If the 'hw_' nomenclature is undesired, other possibilities are
> 'accel_', 'hw_accel_', 'alt_'...
>
> Kim
>

Regards,
Simon