linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: omap3-evm: Fix missing NAND partition information

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]

Date:   Tue, 12 Dec 2017 10:15:03 -0800
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     "Derald D. Woods" <woods.technical@...il.com>
Cc:     Ladislav Michl <ladis@...ux-mips.org>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: omap3-evm: Fix missing NAND partition
 information

* Derald D. Woods <woods.technical@...il.com> [171212 18:11]:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:50:54PM +0100, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 08:55:42AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > * Derald D. Woods <woods.technical@...il.com> [171212 16:34]:
> > > > I am testing using an appended device-tree. This has been the most
> > > > reliable method for the OMAP34XX boards that I have. If you have an
> > > > example config, with working command line MTDPARTS, for beagleboard(Rev.
> > > > C4), Overo TOBI, or similiar OMAP34XX, I will gladly use it. Also note
> > > > that other OMAP34XX boards currently provide a default partition
> > > > layout. Is that bad practice for all of those as well? I am open to
> > > > exploring the method that actually works.
> > > 
> > > I think we came to the conclusion at some point that it's best to rely
> > > on u-boot passed partitions because with later u-boot versions the
> > > size was increased for the bootloader partition.
> > > 
> > > Ideally of course we would read the partition information from the
> > > MTD device somewhere..
> > 
> > Already done and called UBI :)
> 
> I am aware of all of these things. From an architectural standpoint I
> agree with everything that has been said. But has anyone checked booting
> lately? I helped fix an issue in U-Boot, a few months ago, where
> OMAP34XX boards could not boot for one and half releases. Structural
> changes were introduced, but booting was not verified on older OMAP3
> boards. I will build with clean configs, for both U-Boot and Linux, and
> report my findings on this thread. I recently took over maintaining the
> OMAP3-EVM in U-Boot. This is why I am pursuing this effort. I am just
> looking for the consistent and bootable method going forward. It will be
> later tonight before I can verify builds.

Well that's good to hear :) My only concern with your patch is what
happens if somebody boots with older u-boot with different partition
sizes?

Regards,

Tony