From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from magratgarlick.emantor.de ([78.46.208.201]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hueoZ-0005MK-OP for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2019 15:22:25 +0000 References: <20190805140927.14941-1-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> <20190805142405.25n73rcixhctzsvh@pengutronix.de> From: Rouven Czerwinski In-reply-to: <20190805142405.25n73rcixhctzsvh@pengutronix.de> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 17:22:13 +0200 Message-ID: <878ss7myca.fsf@czerwinskis.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: caam - Always do rng selftest To: barebox@lists.infradead.org Roland Hieber writes: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 04:09:27PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: >> - if (caam_need_rng_software_selftest()) { >> + if (!(rd_reg32(&ctrl->r4tst[0].rdsta) & RDSTA_IFMASK)) { > > I'm not sure if I would understand that condition some years later > without a comment, but then I'm not very versed in the NXP CAAM and the > rest of the code also does many things like that without explaining > them, so I guess it's okay :D > > - Roland Maybe: /* * According to 6.10.74.1 of the i.MX6UL Security Reference Manual, * RDSTA_IF1 and RDSTA_IF2 (contained in RDSTA_IFMASK) are flags whether * the state handles have been instantiated. */ We can probably run the self test a second time by skipping the instantiation descriptors and only executing the self test sequence. I don't know if thats really worth it though. Regards, Rouven Czerwinski _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox