On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 at 05:04, AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.aka...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Simon, > > # This is not a direct comment on this patch. > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 01:50:41PM +1030, Joel Stanley wrote: > > Currently the FIT hashing will call directly into the SHA algorithms to > > get a hash. > > > > This moves the fit code to use hash_lookup_algo, giving a common > > entrypoint into the hashing code and removing the duplicated algorithm > > look up. It also allows the use of hardware acceleration if configured. > > > > Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley <j...@jms.id.au> > > --- > > common/image-fit.c | 34 ++++++++-------------------------- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/common/image-fit.c b/common/image-fit.c > > index 28b3d2b19111..3451cdecc95b 100644 > > --- a/common/image-fit.c > > +++ b/common/image-fit.c > > @@ -1210,37 +1210,19 @@ int fit_set_timestamp(void *fit, int noffset, > > time_t timestamp) > > * 0, on success > > * -1, when algo is unsupported > > */ > > -int calculate_hash(const void *data, int data_len, const char *algo, > > +int calculate_hash(const void *data, int data_len, const char *algo_name, > > uint8_t *value, int *value_len) > > { > > - if (IMAGE_ENABLE_CRC32 && strcmp(algo, "crc32") == 0) { > > - *((uint32_t *)value) = crc32_wd(0, data, data_len, > > - CHUNKSZ_CRC32); > > - *((uint32_t *)value) = cpu_to_uimage(*((uint32_t *)value)); > > - *value_len = 4; > > - } else if (IMAGE_ENABLE_SHA1 && strcmp(algo, "sha1") == 0) { > > - sha1_csum_wd((unsigned char *)data, data_len, > > - (unsigned char *)value, CHUNKSZ_SHA1); > > - *value_len = 20; > > - } else if (IMAGE_ENABLE_SHA256 && strcmp(algo, "sha256") == 0) { > > - sha256_csum_wd((unsigned char *)data, data_len, > > - (unsigned char *)value, CHUNKSZ_SHA256); > > - *value_len = SHA256_SUM_LEN; > > - } else if (IMAGE_ENABLE_SHA384 && strcmp(algo, "sha384") == 0) { > > - sha384_csum_wd((unsigned char *)data, data_len, > > - (unsigned char *)value, CHUNKSZ_SHA384); > > - *value_len = SHA384_SUM_LEN; > > - } else if (IMAGE_ENABLE_SHA512 && strcmp(algo, "sha512") == 0) { > > - sha512_csum_wd((unsigned char *)data, data_len, > > - (unsigned char *)value, CHUNKSZ_SHA512); > > - *value_len = SHA512_SUM_LEN; > > - } else if (IMAGE_ENABLE_MD5 && strcmp(algo, "md5") == 0) { > > - md5_wd((unsigned char *)data, data_len, value, CHUNKSZ_MD5); > > - *value_len = 16; > > - } else { > > + struct hash_algo *algo; > > + > > + if (hash_lookup_algo(algo_name, &algo)) { > > debug("Unsupported hash alogrithm\n"); > > return -1; > > } > > + > > + algo->hash_func_ws(data, data_len, value, algo->chunk_size); > > + *value_len = algo->digest_size; > > With this patch applied, there co-exists a very similar, hence > confusing function, hash_calculate(), in rsa-checksum.c (now checksum.c?). > If there is no particular reason for those two functions, > we'd better unify them?
hash_calculate is doing a progressive hash over a count of regions. This code is hashing a single chunk of data. I agree the naming could be improved to make this clearer. Cheers, Joel > > -Takahiro Akashi > > > > return 0; > > } > > > > -- > > 2.30.0 > >