linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: crypto: Add Inside Secure SafeXcel EIP-93 crypto engine

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <dg346xguo5cjx6yotnrdpjyp7n7wwpwnrjvybrrbocekhltpmg@s2j734wd2rnf>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 10:23:54 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, 
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, 
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Richard van Schagen <vschagen@...oud.com>, 
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: crypto: Add Inside Secure
 SafeXcel EIP-93 crypto engine

On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 02:43:18AM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
 +
> +description: |
> +  The Inside Secure SafeXcel EIP-93 is a cryptographic engine IP block
> +  integrated in varios devices with very different and generic name from
> +  PKTE to simply vendor+EIP93. The real IP under the hood is actually
> +  developed by Inside Secure and given to license to vendors.
> +
> +  The IP block is sold with different model based on what feature are
> +  needed and are identified with the final letter. Each letter correspond
> +  to a specific set of feature and multiple letter reflect the sum of the
> +  feature set.

You write it is licensed to vendors, so are you sure these could be
used alone, without vendor customizations/hookups etc? I think you
should have a dedicated, SoC-specific compatible in the front. I am not
sure if this was discussed already, though.
> +
> +  EIP-93 models:
> +    - EIP-93i: (basic) DES/Triple DES, AES, PRNG, IPsec ESP, SRTP, SHA1
> +    - EIP-93ie: i + SHA224/256, AES-192/256
> +    - EIP-93is: i + SSL/DTLS/DTLS, MD5, ARC4
> +    - EIP-93ies: i + e + s
> +    - EIP-93iw: i + AES-XCB-MAC, AES-CCM
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    enum:
> +      - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93i
> +      - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93ie
> +      - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93is
> +      - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93ies
> +      - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93iw
> +
> +  reg:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  interrupts:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +  - interrupts
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> +
> +    crypto@...04000 {
> +      compatible = "inside-secure,safexcel-eip93ies";
> +      reg = <0x1fb70000 0x1000>;

Looks like not matching unit address.

Best regards,
Krzysztof