From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 14:19:09 +0300
Subject: [U-Boot] RSA in U-Boot
In-Reply-To: <20190516111359.GQ22232@bill-the-cat>
References: <20190318021712.GC9937@linaro.org>
 <20190425021223.GH7158@linaro.org>
 <99c1f624-be7f-b6ab-10be-420129670dbf@csgraf.de>
 <747471f3-4490-bfe7-7369-68846f2b4ea3@redhat.com>
 <422971965.15677087.1556343097301.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
 <4b32b851-181e-5846-c5b0-17cadae06f33@gmx.de>
 <CADg8p96SiOJe+QT9-EUnrwW7FHiYp=w8PFQ7yUAoNb32aWEzHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190516103902.C27F1245E45@gemini.denx.de>
 <20190516104554.GA15680@apalos>
 <20190516111359.GQ22232@bill-the-cat>
Message-ID: <20190516111909.GA24065@apalos>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Tom,
> > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 12:39:02PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Hello Wolfgang, 
> > 
> > Thanks for taking the time with this
> > > > 
> > > > There is LibreSSL as well which is a fork of openssl. Guess that too should
> > > > be fine. What would be the more preferred solution here. The relevant bits
> > > > can be imported from the kernel code into u-boot, or there can be a
> > > > solution with linking of ssl/tls library with u-boot. Which would be the
> > > > more preferred solution. It'd be great if the maintainers can comment on
> > > > this. Thanks.
> > > 
> > > I'd go for the Linux kernel code.  A number of issues we have here
> > > (cross compiling, code size, license compatibility, long term
> > > maintenance efforts) have already been considered there, so why
> > > should we duplicate all these efforts?  And if we did, is there any
> > > clear benefit from doing this?
> > Well someone has to port the linux code in U-Boot and maintain it though.
> > 
> > The LibreSSL proposal was made with some of these in mind. 
> > We don't expect the licence to ever change (which is compatible) 
> > and it's being maintained. 
> > I am not sure on the portability status, but i think it runs on all major
> > architectures.
> > 
> > I'd imagine this lifts the maintenance burden from U-Boot. On the other 
> > hand we'll rely on an external library to offer the functionality. 
> 
> I don't see how using LibreSSL instead of Linux kernel code would have a
> lesser maintenance burden, sorry.  If anything, given the number of
> parts of the code we have today that come from the Linux kernel, adding
> one more to the "keep in sync, or at least port bugfixes" list is less
> than "add a new external project to keep an eye on".
> 
Right then we know what we have to do. Kernel code it is. 

Thanks a lot 
/Ilias