Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add model identifier to vendor headers #3048

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 2, 2023
Merged

Add model identifier to vendor headers #3048

merged 6 commits into from
Jun 2, 2023

Conversation

matejcik
Copy link
Contributor

@matejcik matejcik commented May 31, 2023

resolves #3028

this means that we currently can't build production versions of T2B1 because we don't have the signed headers

@matejcik matejcik self-assigned this May 31, 2023
@matejcik matejcik requested a review from prusnak as a code owner May 31, 2023 14:03
@matejcik matejcik requested review from TychoVrahe and removed request for prusnak May 31, 2023 14:03
Copy link
Contributor

@TychoVrahe TychoVrahe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Prodtest VH for T2B1 is missing - is that because we don't have pubkeys yet?

It might be better to replace satoshilabs vendor image for T2B1 with something that T2B1 can display? Applies to unsafe VH too. It should save some flash space too.

Can't verify that pubkeys for T2B1 satoshilabs VH are correct.

core/SConscript.firmware Show resolved Hide resolved
@matejcik
Copy link
Contributor Author

matejcik commented Jun 1, 2023

Prodtest VH for T2B1 is missing - is that because we don't have pubkeys yet?

yes

It might be better to replace satoshilabs vendor image for T2B1 with something that T2B1 can display? Applies to unsafe VH too. It should save some flash space too.

also yes

Can't verify that pubkeys for T2B1 satoshilabs VH are correct.

notion

@Hannsek Hannsek linked an issue Jun 1, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@matejcik matejcik requested a review from TychoVrahe June 1, 2023 15:12
@matejcik
Copy link
Contributor Author

matejcik commented Jun 1, 2023

vendor images 64x64 b&w

vendor_unsafe_new
vendor_satoshilabs_new

i would like to test them with the bootloader emulator (some changes might be needed)

@TychoVrahe
Copy link
Contributor

64x64 seems too much, but with 32x32 we could make it look like this, which seems reasonable (to me):

emu00000000

@TychoVrahe
Copy link
Contributor

or we can just not show it. can't really fit "UNSAFE, DO NOT USE!" to right half of the screen and to split lines in the bootloader seems excessive.

@matejcik
Copy link
Contributor Author

matejcik commented Jun 2, 2023

the layout engine can split lines already 🤷‍♀️

if we go with your design, i think the version number isn't supposed to be there?

@matejcik
Copy link
Contributor Author

matejcik commented Jun 2, 2023

noting here for posterity that we're keeping the 64x64 images for now, but will most likely change them for the final version of the bootloader

@matejcik matejcik force-pushed the matejcik/vh-model branch from 6730243 to a535a6d Compare June 2, 2023 12:46
@matejcik matejcik force-pushed the matejcik/vh-model branch from a535a6d to ccb6325 Compare June 2, 2023 12:49
@matejcik matejcik force-pushed the matejcik/vh-model branch from ccb6325 to 703a385 Compare June 2, 2023 12:49
@matejcik matejcik merged commit 703a385 into master Jun 2, 2023
@matejcik matejcik deleted the matejcik/vh-model branch June 2, 2023 13:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add model field to vendor header
2 participants