linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/32] ARM: dts: omap3-gta04: make NAND partitions compatible with recent U-Boot

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: <20180725083305.GB8303@lenoch>
Date:   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 10:33:05 +0200
From:   Ladislav Michl <ladis@...ux-mips.org>
To:     "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
Cc:     Marek Belisko <marek@...delico.com>,
        Benoît Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/32] ARM: dts: omap3-gta04: make NAND partitions
 compatible with recent U-Boot

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:18:28AM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> > Am 25.07.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Ladislav Michl <ladis@...ux-mips.org>:
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 08:58:41AM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> >> Vendor defined U-Boot has changed the partition scheme a while ago:
> >> 
> >> * kernel partition 6MB
> >> * file system partition uses the remainder up to end of the NAND
> >> * increased size of the environment partition (to get an OneNAND compatible base address)
> >> * shrink the U-Boot partition
> >> 
> >> Let's be compatible (e.g. Debian kernel built from upstream).
> > 
> > That, in fact, is breaking compatibility.
> 
> With what? Nobody is using the old u-boot partition scheme any more
> (it is >5 years old).
> 
> > So once you are touching this
> > what about relying on partitioning provided by bootloader just to prevent
> > something like this happening again?
> 
> Well, we define what compatible means here (since we are the vendor).
> And people complain with us. We simply recommend them to upgrade the
> boot-loader.

Fair enough. Suggestion was to remove partitioning scheme from DTB alltogether
and let U-Boot provide one. But you being vendor you decide, of course :)
(I'd use only two partitions: MLO and UBI, latter one with BCH8, and store
everything in UBI volumes. That's a bit more flexible approach)

	ladis

> BR,
> Nikolaus
> 
> > 
> > 	ladis
> > 
> >> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com>
> >> ---
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-gta04.dtsi | 12 ++++++------
> >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-gta04.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-gta04.dtsi
> >> index 65f77a0b5dd4..03fe404cbf56 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-gta04.dtsi
> >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-gta04.dtsi
> >> @@ -645,22 +645,22 @@
> >> 
> >> 		bootloaders@...00 {
> >> 			label = "U-Boot";
> >> -			reg = <0x80000 0x1e0000>;
> >> +			reg = <0x80000 0x1c0000>;
> >> 		};
> >> 
> >> -		bootloaders_env@...000 {
> >> +		bootloaders_env@...000 {
> >> 			label = "U-Boot Env";
> >> -			reg = <0x260000 0x20000>;
> >> +			reg = <0x240000 0x40000>;
> >> 		};
> >> 
> >> 		kernel@...000 {
> >> 			label = "Kernel";
> >> -			reg = <0x280000 0x400000>;
> >> +			reg = <0x280000 0x600000>;
> >> 		};
> >> 
> >> -		filesystem@...000 {
> >> +		filesystem@...000 {
> >> 			label = "File System";
> >> -			reg = <0x680000 0xf980000>;
> >> +			reg = <0x880000 0>;	/* 0 = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL */
> >> 		};
> >> 	};
> >> };
> >> -- 
> >> 2.12.2
> >> 
> >> --
> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
> >> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> >> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html