From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: runtime check for omap-aes bus access permission (was: Re: 3.13-rc3 (commit 7ce93f3) breaks Nokia N900 DT boot) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 21:43:42 +0100 Message-ID: <20150211204342.GE29636@amd> References: <20131206213613.GA19648@earth.universe> <201501312009.58483@pali> <201502010956.28662@pali> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:53344 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752452AbbBKUnp (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:43:45 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201502010956.28662@pali> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= Cc: Matthijs van Duin , Joel Fernandes , Tony Lindgren , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Aaro Koskinen , Nishanth Menon , Sebastian Reichel Hi! On Sun 2015-02-01 09:56:28, Pali Roh=E1r wrote: > On Sunday 01 February 2015 02:36:06 Matthijs van Duin wrote: > > On 31 January 2015 at 20:06, Pali Roh=E1r =20 > > 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. > >=20 > > 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.) > >=20 >=20 > Nokia X-Loader is closed source and signed. So we cannot modify=20 > it. And it is responsible for configuring L3/L4 firewall. >=20 > Year ago it was possible to find on internet signed X-Loader for=20 > N900 which enable omap aes support (for testing purpose together=20 > with open source linux kernel modules), but it is unofficial and=20 > I think there only too few people who flashed it into N900 nand.=20 > If somebody needs binaries I have backup all of them. >=20 > More info about that aes enabled X-Loader: > http://maemo.org/community/maemo-developers/n900_aes_and_sha1-md5_hw_= acceleration_drivers/ >=20 > Majority of users use only official X-Loader which does not=20 > enable aes support so we cannot enable kernel modules (cause=20 > crashes). And also we cannot force users to flash some unofficial=20 > binary into their device... BTW... it would be interesting to know... are you doing some heavy crypto processing on N900? Are the accelerated drivers faster than non-accelerated ones? Because the link above says they are slower... # Eric Wheeler # ... # Hey guys, I have omap-aes compiled for my kernel and appears to be # working. #=20 # I do not understand why non-accelerated software-crypto is faster tha= n # the omap-aes hardware acceleration: #=20 # mmcblk0 onboard 32GB: read=3D21.76MB/s write=3D12.97MB/s # aes_generic crypto: read=3D 8.47 write=3D 5.54 # omap-aes hw crypto: read=3D 6.31 write=3D 5.45 #=20 # mmcblk1 uSD 16GB Class 10: read=3D16.05MB/s write=3D16.47MB/s # aes_generic crypto: read=3D 7.96 write=3D 7.43 # omap-aes hw crypto: read=3D 6.67 write=3D 7.18 Best regards, Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses= /blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html