[PATCH v2 00/16] efi_loader: add secure boot support

[AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 08:54:12PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 09:41:56AM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > Simon,
> > 
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 05:28:59PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 08:31:26AM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > > > On 12/4/19 3:43 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > > >Tom, Simon, Heinrich,
> > > > >
> > > > >I have submitted three major patch sets for UEFI secure boot:
> > > > >* x509/pkcs7 parser
> > > > >* RSA library extension
> > > > >* UEFI secure boot
> > > > >
> > > > >I have no technical issues to fix now and have seen only a few minor
> > > > >comments on them (if I confirm that you have no more comments,
> > > > >I can submit new version almost immediately).
> > > > >Considering those, can I expect that those patches be merged
> > > > >in v2020.01?
> > > > >
> > > > >If not, do you need to have more time for your reviewing?
> > > > >What else do you expect from my side to accelerate the upstream?
> > > > 
> > > > We are reaching the end of the release cycle. So do not expect any of
> > > > these patch series to be merged in v2020.01.
> > > > cf. https://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle
> > > 
> > > I have often seen several patches (not bug fix) merged
> > > even after "merge window".
> > > Anyway,
> > > 
> > > > To my understanding the UEFI secure boot series depends on the other two
> > > > so it must be merged last.
> > > 
> > > So once the first two patch set are accepted by the maintainers,
> > > do you agree to merging the third one (i.e. secure boot patch itself)
> > > promptly?
> > >         -> Heinrich
> > > 
> > > As I said, I have had no technical issues on the first two patches
> > > and haven't heard any comments/objections from the maintainers so far.
> > > Are you willing to accept them for the next release?
> > >         -> Tom, Simon
> > 
> > Can you confirm that you have queued my "RSA library extension" patch
> > in your -next(?) branch, please?
> 
> Please note that I raised a concern with the RSA patch series that needs
> to be addressed.  There's unexplained / unexpected size growth on
> platforms that aren't otherwise enabling new features.  Thanks!

I misunderstood your statement there.
Questions:
1) How did you measure the size growth?
   Please specify the exact command(s).
2) Did you use T1042RDB_PI_NAND_SECURE_BOOT_defconfig without any change?

I want to reproduce your result on my side.

Thanks,
-Takahiro Akashi


> -- 
> Tom