linux-kernel - Re: [U-Boot] [v4 PATCH] RISCV: image: Add booti support

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:   Mon, 6 May 2019 22:39:56 +0200
From:   Karsten Merker <merker@...ian.org>
To:     Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@....de>
Cc:     Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Tom Rini <trini@...sulko.com>,
        Karsten Merker <merker@...ian.org>,
        Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
        Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
        Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@...il.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>,
        Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger@...com>,
        Lukas Auer <lukas.auer@...ec.fraunhofer.de>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        Rick Chen <rick@...estech.com>, Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
        u-boot@...ts.denx.de
Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [v4 PATCH] RISCV: image: Add booti support

On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 10:06:39PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 5/6/19 8:11 PM, Atish Patra wrote:
> > This patch adds booti support for RISC-V Linux kernel. The existing
> > bootm method will also continue to work as it is.
[...]
> > +	"boot arm64/riscv Linux Image image from memory", booti_help_text
> 
> %s/Image image/image/
> 
> "arm64/riscv" is distracting. If I am on RISC-V I cannot boot an ARM64
> image here. Remove the reference to the architecture, please.

Hello,

I'm not sure about the last point - ISTR (please correct me if my
memory betrays me here) that an arm64 U-Boot can in principle be
used to boot either an arm64 or an armv7 kernel, but the commands
are different in those cases (booti for an arm64 "Image" format
kernel and bootz for an armv7 "zImage" format kernel), so having
the information which kernel format is supported by the
respective commands appears useful to me.  If the arm64 kernel
image format would have a distinctive name (like "zImage" on
armv7 or "bzImage" on x86) that would be less problematic, but
with the confusion potential of "boot a Linux Image" (as in the
arm64/riscv-specific "Image" format) vs "boot a Linux image" (as
in generally some form of kernel image), I think explicitly
mentioning the supported architectures makes sense.

Regards,
Karsten
-- 
Ich widerspreche hiermit ausdrücklich der Nutzung sowie der
Weitergabe meiner personenbezogenen Daten für Zwecke der Werbung
sowie der Markt- oder Meinungsforschung.