[PATCH] binman: add fast authentication method for i.MX8M signing

[Simon Glass]

Hi Brian,

On Mon, 30 Sept 2024 at 08:47, Brian Ruley <brian.ruley at gehealthcare.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 08:10:49AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> >
> > WARNING: This email originated from outside of GE HealthCare. Please validate the sender's email address before clicking on links or attachments as they may not be safe.
> >
> > Hi Brian,
> >
> > On Mon, 30 Sept 2024 at 07:01, Brian Ruley <brian.ruley at gehealthcare.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 06:46:23PM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 04:49:17PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > Hi Fabio,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 29 Sept 2024 at 14:53, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Simon, Marek, and Tom,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 5:47???PM Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please can you coordinate with Marek as we need to sort out the test
> > > > > > > > coverage for this etype, before adding more functionality. I did a
> > > > > > > > starting point, now in -next, which should help.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, when someone has both time and understanding of the tools and the
> > > > > > > frameworks, we can expand the automatic tests while still having
> > > > > > > functional testing as people use the feature.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you think this patch should be applied as is? Could the tests be
> > > > > > handled later?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please let me know.
> > > > >
> > > > > Who is going to handle the tests later and when?
> > > >
> > > > Someone, once how to write and run the tests is documented. That's a
> > > > big hurdle this private thread has shown, to me at least.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Tom
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I fixed a minor issue in the patch, and sent a revised version.
> > >
> > > Seems that you don't have the testing quite defined yet, so I don't know
> > > what I can contribute there. Maybe something can be done with the CSF
> > > parser to check that the signing works correctly?
> >
> > Just to be clear, the testing is fully defined...this is actually the
> > only entry type which doesn't have a proper test. Every other user was
> > able to add a test. The goal here isn't really to check that external
> > tools are working (they should have their own tests), more to check
> > that Binman is doing the right thing.
> >
> > I will get some sort of patch out by tomorrow morning to help this process.
> >
> > >
> > > However, I think this feature is quite benign, and it would be great to
> > > get some functional testing in for this feature, as Tom said. For us,
> > > this is an important feature, so we have done extensive testing
> > > internally to verify that it works.
> >
> > I fully understand that...but of course without an automated test in
> > Binman it may break at any moment, as Binman continues to be expanded.
> >
> > BTW, minor code-style things: U-Boot's Python code uses single quotes
> > and the line limit is 80cols.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Simon
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> > Just to be clear, the testing is fully defined...this is actually the
> > only entry type which doesn't have a proper test. Every other user was
> > able to add a test. The goal here isn't really to check that external
> > tools are working (they should have their own tests), more to check
> > that Binman is doing the right thing.
> >
> > I will get some sort of patch out by tomorrow morning to help this process.
>
> Alrighty. I'll include a test once we get this sorted out.
>
> > BTW, minor code-style things: U-Boot's Python code uses single quotes
> > and the line limit is 80cols.
>
> I don't understand what you mean because I did use single quotes :)
> Perhaps you were looking at the CSF template, which is not Python code?

Ah OK, I see. It would be less confusing if you used f-strings.
Unfortunately Binman does not use them always and there are tons of
pylint warnings about it.

>
> As for the column width, sorry, I was only trying to follow the pattern
> in the file. I thought it was 120 cols. I will include a predecessor
> patch to fix the column width to 80.

Oh, OK, yes I wasn't around when the original patch was sent so didn't
review it.

Regards,
SImon