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]

Date:   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 15:26:03 +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 02:27:31PM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> > Am 25.07.2018 um 10:33 schrieb Ladislav Michl <ladis@...ux-mips.org>:
> > 
> > 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)
> 
> Yes, that is a good goal for a future setup and would of course be better.
> Like U-Boot already provides the memory layout for RAM.
> 
> Hopefully, someone will work out patches for u-boot plus kernel (which is always
> painful to keep these two in sync and tested). But I don't want to do that now.

At kernel side the only patch needed is to remove partitioning scheme from DTB
and u-boot setup can be merely copied from board/isee/igep00x0
Not having hardware I cannot really test it ;-)

Best regards,
	ladis