linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 5/5] of: unittest: Statically apply overlays using fdtoverlay

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:   Fri, 22 Jan 2021 08:40:49 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>
Cc:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bill Mills <bill.mills@...aro.org>, anmar.oueja@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 5/5] of: unittest: Statically apply overlays using
 fdtoverlay

On 22-01-21, 10:39, David Gibson wrote:
> No, it definitely will not work in general.  It might kinda work in a
> few trivial cases, but it absolutely will not do the neccessary
> handling in some cases.
> 
> > I
> > did inspect the output dtb (made by merging two overlays) using
> > fdtdump and it looked okay.
> 
> Ok.. but if you're using these bizarre messed up "dtbs" that this test
> code seems to be, I don't really trust that tells you much.

I only looked if the changes from the second overlay were present in
the merge and they were. And so I assumed that it must have worked.

What about checking the base dtb for /plugin/; in fdtoverlay and fail
the whole thing in case it is present ? I think it is possible for
people to get confused otherwise, like I did.

-- 
viresh