linux-kernel - Re: Removal of qcom,board-id and qcom,msm-id

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAA8EJprOg3ZTonrCSbd1a233247G182=VvX4sNeKcGPbmJME3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 22 May 2022 13:50:08 +0300
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Removal of qcom,board-id and qcom,msm-id

Adding Amit to the CC list.

On Sun, 22 May 2022 at 13:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On 20/05/2022 03:39, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I vaguely recall that the properties had to be extracted during the
> >> boot.img creation process to create a table of contents header. But
> >> after some time the bootloader started scanning the DTBs directly for
> >> the vendor properties and thus the header was deprecated/removed. If the
> >> bootloader is doing the scanning then I'm not sure what is preventing
> >> the properties from being documented and allowed. I think the main
> >> rejection was that the properties were added purely to be extracted
> >> during post processing and placed into the table of contents header,
> >> i.e. they weren't actually used by the kernel or the bootloader. If they
> >> are now used by the bootloader it sounds OK to me if they're kept
> >> around.
> >
> > Yes, as far as I understand, they are used by the bootloader directly.
> >
>
> I entirely missed one part - Stephen's patches from 2015 were actually
> applied and since 2015 we expect all boards to follow convention:
>
> compatible =
> "qcom,<SoC>[-<soc_version>][-<foundry_id>]-<board>[/<subtype>][-<board_version>]"
>
> The patchset was accepted, although in the thread I do not see "Applied"
> message.
>
> Stephen,
> can you or anyone else confirm that the dtbTool Qualcomm uses (and/or
> bootloader) are adjusted as well to these new compatibles?
>
> If yes, we can simply remove board-id and msm-id properties from new
> boards, because 7 years was enough to switch to these new tools...

Amit, can you please comment on the AOSP image build process and the
possibility to drop the board-id/msm-id from the dts files in favour
of using the dtbTool.


-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry