linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mtd: Add a schema for binman

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 Sep 2023 11:00:38 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot@...ts.denx.de>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, Tom Rini <trini@...sulko.com>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mtd: Add a schema for binman

On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 1:45 PM Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> Binman[1] is a tool for creating firmware images. It allows you to
> combine various binaries and place them in an output file.
>
> Binman uses a DT schema to describe an image, in enough detail that
> it can be automatically built from component parts, disassembled,
> replaced, listed, etc.
>
> Images are typically stored in flash, which is why this binding is
> targeted at mtd. Previous discussion is at [2] [3].
>
> [1] https://u-boot.readthedocs.io/en/stable/develop/package/binman.html
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20230821180220.2724080-3-sjg@chromium.org/
> [3] https://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg626149.html

You missed:

https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/pull/110

where I said: We certainly shouldn't duplicate the existing partitions
bindings. What's missing from them (I assume we're mostly talking
about "fixed-partitions" which has been around forever I think (before
me))?

To repeat, unless there is some reason binman partitions conflict with
fixed-partitions, you need to start there and extend it. From what's
posted here, it neither conflicts nor needs extending.

I did a bit more research. "fixed-partitions" as a compatible has
"only" been around since 2015. Prior to that, it was implicit with
just partition nodes with addresses (i.e. reg) and that dates back to
2007. Looks like u-boot only supports the newer form and since 2021.

Rob