yuzu-emu/mbedtls
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity
mbedtls/library/legacy_or_psa.h

203 lines
8.9 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
/**
* Internal macros to express dependencies for code and tests
* that may use either the legacy API or PSA in various builds.
*
* Copyright The Mbed TLS Contributors
* SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
*
* Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may
* not use this file except in compliance with the License.
* You may obtain a copy of the License at
*
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
*
* Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
* distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT
* WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
* limitations under the License.
*/
/*
* These macros are for code that wants to use <crypto feature> and will do so
* using <legacy API> or PSA depending on <condition>, where:
* - <crypto feature> will generally be an algorithm (SHA-256, ECDH) but may
* also be a key type (AES, RSA, EC) or domain parameters (elliptic curve);
* - <legacy API> will be either:
* - low-level module API (aes.h, sha256.h), or
* - an abstraction layer (md.h, cipher.h);
* - <condition> will be either:
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
* - depending on what's available in the build:
* legacy API used if available, PSA otherwise
* (this is done to ensure backwards compatibility); or
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
* - depending on whether MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO is defined.
*
* Examples:
* - TLS 1.2 will compute hashes using either mbedtls_md_xxx() (and
* mbedtls_sha256_xxx()) or psa_aead_xxx() depending on whether
* MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO is defined;
* - RSA PKCS#1 v2.1 will, in the near future*, compute hashes (for padding)
* using either `mbedtls_md()` if it's available, or `psa_hash_compute()`
* otherwise;
* - PEM decoding of PEM-encrypted keys will, in the near future*, compute MD5
* hashes using either `mbedtls_md5_xxx()` if it's available, or
* `psa_hash_xxx()` otherwise.
* *See docs/architecture/psa-migration/strategy.md, section "Supporting
* builds with drivers without the software implementation", strategy for step
* 1 (libmbedcrypto except the RNG subsystem).
*
* Note: the macros are essential to express test dependencies. Inside code,
* we could instead just use the equivalent pre-processor condition, but
* that's not possible in test dependencies where we need a single macro.
* Hopefully, using these macros in code will also help with consistency.
*
* The naming scheme for these macros is:
* MBEDTLS_HAS_feature_VIA_legacy_OR_PSA(_condition)
* where:
* - feature is expressed the same way as in PSA_WANT macros, for example:
* KEY_TYPE_AES, ALG_SHA_256, ECC_SECP_R1_256;
* - legacy is either LOWLEVEL or the name of the layer: MD, CIPHER;
Fix a few more typos Update link while at it. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 20:37:12 +02:00
* - condition is omitted if it's based on availability, else it's
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
* BASED_ON_USE_PSA.
*
* Coming back to the examples above:
* - TLS 1.2 will determine if it can use SHA-256 using
* MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_256_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
* for the purposes of negotiation, and in test dependencies;
* - RSA PKCS#1 v2.1 tests that used SHA-256 will depend on
* MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_256_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
* - PEM decoding code and its associated tests will depend on
* MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_MD5_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
*
* Note: every time it's possible to use, say SHA-256, via the MD API, then
* it's also possible to used it via the low-level API. So, code that wants to
* use SHA-256 via both APIs only needs to depend on the MD macro. Also, it
* just so happens that all the choosing which API to use based on
* MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO (X.509, TLS 1.2/shared), always uses the abstraction
* layer (sometimes in addition to the low-level API), so we don't need the
* MBEDTLS_HAS_feature_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA macros.
* (PK, while obeying MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO, doesn't compute hashes itself,
* even less makes use of ciphers.)
*
* Note: the macros MBEDTLS_HAS_feature_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA are the minimal
* condition for being able to use <feature> at all. As such, they should be
* used for guarding data about <feature>, such as OIDs or size. For example,
* OID values related to SHA-256 are only useful when SHA-256 can be used at
* least in some way.
*/
#ifndef MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_HELPERS_H
#define MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_HELPERS_H
#include "common.h"
/*
* Hashes
*/
/* Hashes using low-level or PSA based on availability */
#if defined(MBEDTLS_MD5_C) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_MD5) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_MD5_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_RIPEMD160_C) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_RIPEMD160) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_RIPEMD160_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_SHA1_C) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_1) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_SHA224_C) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_224) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_224_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_SHA256_C) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_256) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_256_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_SHA384_C) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_384) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_384_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_SHA512_C) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_512) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_512_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA
#endif
/* Hashes using MD or PSA based on availability */
#if ( defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_MD5_C) ) || \
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
( !defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_MD5) )
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_MD5_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
#endif
#if ( defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_RIPEMD160_C) ) || \
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
( !defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_RIPEMD160) )
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_RIPEMD160_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
#endif
#if ( defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA1_C) ) || \
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
( !defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_1) )
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
#endif
#if ( defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA224_C) ) || \
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
( !defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_224) )
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_224_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
#endif
#if ( defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA256_C) ) || \
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
( !defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_256) )
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_256_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
#endif
#if ( defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA384_C) ) || \
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
( !defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_384) )
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_384_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
#endif
#if ( defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA512_C) ) || \
Fix definition of MD_OR_PSA macros The code will make the decision based on availability of MD, not of MD+this_hash. The later would only be possible at runtime (the hash isn't known until then, that's the whole point of MD), so we'd need to have both MD-based and PSA-based code paths in a single build, which would have a very negative impact on code size. So, instead, we choose based on the presence of MD, which is know at compile time, so we only have one of the two code paths in each build. Adjust the macros so that they match the logic of the code using them. Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-27 23:04:21 +02:00
( !defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_512) )
Rework macros expressing dependencies Fix usage with sed: s/MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_LOWLEVEL_OR_PSA/ s/MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_WANT_\([A-Z_0-9]*\)/MBEDTLS_HAS_\1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA/ Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
2022-07-21 10:40:13 +02:00
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_512_VIA_MD_OR_PSA
#endif
/* Hashes using MD or PSA based on MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO */
#if ( !defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_MD5_C) ) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_MD5) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_MD5_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
#endif
#if ( !defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_RIPEMD160_C) ) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_RIPEMD160) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_RIPEMD160_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
#endif
#if ( !defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA1_C) ) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_1) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_1_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
#endif
#if ( !defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA224_C) ) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_224) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_224_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
#endif
#if ( !defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA256_C) ) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_256) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_256_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
#endif
#if ( !defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA384_C) ) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_384) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_384_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
#endif
#if ( !defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && \
defined(MBEDTLS_MD_C) && defined(MBEDTLS_SHA512_C) ) || \
( defined(MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO) && defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_SHA_512) )
#define MBEDTLS_HAS_ALG_SHA_512_VIA_MD_OR_PSA_BASED_ON_USE_PSA
#endif
#endif /* MBEDTLS_OR_PSA_HELPERS_H */
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink