[PATCH 06/18] image: Drop IMAGE_ENABLE_SHA1

[Simon Glass]

Hi Alex,

On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 17:13, Alex G. <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/20/21 12:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 20:41, Alex G. <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/19/21 4:55 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> >>> Hi Alex,
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 11:44, Alex G <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 5/19/21 11:36 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Alexandru,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 10:38, Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> From: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We already have a host Kconfig for SHA1. Use CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SHA1)
> >>>>>> directly in the code shared with the host build, so we can drop the
> >>>>>> unnecessary indirection.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>     common/image-fit.c | 2 +-
> >>>>>>     include/image.h    | 8 --------
> >>>>>>     2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/common/image-fit.c b/common/image-fit.c
> >>>>>> index e614643fe3..24e92a8e92 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/common/image-fit.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/common/image-fit.c
> >>>>>> @@ -1218,7 +1218,7 @@ int calculate_hash(const void *data, int data_len, const char *algo,
> >>>>>>                                                            CHUNKSZ_CRC32);
> >>>>>>                    *((uint32_t *)value) = cpu_to_uimage(*((uint32_t *)value));
> >>>>>>                    *value_len = 4;
> >>>>>> -       } else if (IMAGE_ENABLE_SHA1 && strcmp(algo, "sha1") == 0) {
> >>>>>> +       } else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SHA1) && strcmp(algo, "sha1") == 0) {
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This can only work if the my host Kconfig patch comes first. Otherwise
> >>>>> this code will just be skipped on the host.
> >>>>
> >>>> I was scratching my head too as to why this works in practice, but not
> >>>> in theory. There is a #define CONFIG_SHA1 in image.h.
> >>>>
> >>>> Although not a perfect fix, we go from two ways to enable SHA1 ("#define
> >>>> IMAGE_ENABLE_SHA1", and "#define CONFIG_SHA1"), to just one. That's why
> >>>> I think this change is an improvement, and part of this series.
> >>>
> >>> No, we really should not do that...everything needs to be in Kconfig.
> >>
> >> I agree for target code. But, as a long term solution, let's look at how
> >> we can get hash algos in linker lists, like we're proposing to do for
> >> crytpo algos. Or I could just drop this change in v2.
> >
> > Would it not be easier to have a host Kconfig for these? You seem to
> > be going to extreme lengths to avoid it, but it seems like the
> > simplest solution, easy to understand, no effect on code size and
> > scalable to the future.
>
> It's easy for the short term in terms if the goal is to get something
> merged. It just hides more fundamental issues with the code. For
> ecample, why is there hash_calculate() and clacultae_hash()

It is just a naming issue, isn't it? They are quite different functions.

>
> I was under the impression that we were agreed on the combination of
> patches. I won't try to defend your patch from yourself. I'll drop the
> hash changes from v2 if it helps get things moving along.

I'm OK with this as a short-term fix to get this series through. But I
think we are going to end up with a Kconfig solution at some point.
What do you think?

Regards,
Simon