Re: runtime check for omap-aes bus access permission (was: Re: 3.13-rc3 (commit 7ce93f3) breaks Nokia N900 DT boot)

["Pali Rohár" <pali.rohar@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1614 bytes --]

On Sunday 01 February 2015 02:36:06 Matthijs van Duin wrote:
> On 31 January 2015 at 20:06, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> > I have configured two testing N900 devices. One with signed
> > bootloader which enable omap aes support and one device with
> > signed bootloader which does not enable omap aes support.
> 
> I'm probably missing some context here, but why not just use
> the one with aes support? Alternatively, one may argue that
> it's the bootloader's job to provide the kernel with an
> accurate device tree. (Though one may equally well argue that
> it would be nice to avoid having to customize the device tree
> for every feature-flavor of a processor, especially if this
> depends on how it's initialized.)
> 

Nokia X-Loader is closed source and signed. So we cannot modify 
it. And it is responsible for configuring L3/L4 firewall.

Year ago it was possible to find on internet signed X-Loader for 
N900 which enable omap aes support (for testing purpose together 
with open source linux kernel modules), but it is unofficial and 
I think there only too few people who flashed it into N900 nand. 
If somebody needs binaries I have backup all of them.

More info about that aes enabled X-Loader:
http://maemo.org/community/maemo-developers/n900_aes_and_sha1-md5_hw_acceleration_drivers/

Majority of users use only official X-Loader which does not 
enable aes support so we cannot enable kernel modules (cause 
crashes). And also we cannot force users to flash some unofficial 
binary into their device...

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]