[U-Boot] USE_HOSTCC in lib/rsa/rsa-verify.c

[U-Boot] USE_HOSTCC in lib/rsa/rsa-verify.c

[Andre Wolokita]

Hi Simon,

Could you please explain the used of #ifndef(USE_HOSTCC) in the rsa_verify_key function in rsa-verify.c? I've written a HW hashing driver and need to use the software mod-exp function as we don't have a hardware driver for this (yet.) I get all kinds of compilation errors if USE_HOSTCC is explicitely defined (say in a config header.) You're advice would be appreciated.

Regards,

Andre.

-- 
Andre Wolokita (andre.wolokita at analog.com)
Design Engineer, Analog Devices Australia Pty Ltd
Unit 3, 97 Lewis Road, Wantirna, Victoria, 3152, AUSTRALIA
Direct: +61 3 9881 9933   Main: +61 3 9881 9999
Fax: +61 3 9881 9988      Web: www.analog.com/au

Embedded & Digital Signal Processing Software.

This communication is proprietary and confidential. 

[U-Boot] USE_HOSTCC in lib/rsa/rsa-verify.c

[Simon Glass]

Hi Andre,

On 28 June 2015 at 19:03, Andre Wolokita <andre.wolokita@analog.com> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Could you please explain the used of #ifndef(USE_HOSTCC) in the rsa_verify_key function in rsa-verify.c? I've written a HW hashing driver and need to use the software mod-exp function as we don't have a hardware driver for this (yet.) I get all kinds of compilation errors if USE_HOSTCC is explicitely defined (say in a config header.) You're advice would be appreciated.

It's there to allow the host compiler to build it - I think it is used
by the fit_check_sign tool to check that the signature matches.

You shouldn't define USE_HOSTCC unless you are building host tools. If
you are building for a target then it should use the target compiler.

>
> Regards,
>
> Andre.
>
> --
> Andre Wolokita (andre.wolokita at analog.com)
> Design Engineer, Analog Devices Australia Pty Ltd
> Unit 3, 97 Lewis Road, Wantirna, Victoria, 3152, AUSTRALIA
> Direct: +61 3 9881 9933   Main: +61 3 9881 9999
> Fax: +61 3 9881 9988      Web: www.analog.com/au
>
> Embedded & Digital Signal Processing Software.
>
> This communication is proprietary and confidential.
>

Probably not!

Regards,
Simon