linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] arm64: boot: Support Flat Image Tree

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, 29 Nov 2023 15:10:09 -0500
From:   Tom Rini <trini@...sulko.com>
To:     Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot@...ts.denx.de>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Terrell <terrelln@...com>,
        Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] arm64: boot: Support Flat Image Tree

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 08:16:20PM +0100, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello Tom,
> 
> On 29.11.23 20:02, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 07:59:00PM +0100, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> a few more comments after decompiling the FIT image:
> >>
> >> On 29.11.23 18:21, Simon Glass wrote:
> >>> +    with fsw.add_node('kernel'):
> >>> +        fsw.property_string('description', args.name)
> >>> +        fsw.property_string('type', 'kernel_noload')
> >>
> >> The specification only says no loading done, but doesn't explain what it
> >> means for a bootloader to _not_ load an image. Looking into the U-Boot commit
> >> b9b50e89d317 ("image: Implement IH_TYPE_KERNEL_NOLOAD") that introduces this,
> >> apparently no loading means ignoring load and entry address?
> >>
> >> I presume missing load and entry is something older U-Boot versions
> >> were unhappy about? Please let me know if the semantics are as I understood,
> >> so I can prepare a barebox patch supporting it.
> > 
> > So the matching side for this series in U-Boot is:
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=382849&state=*
> > 
> > And in short, for IH_TYPE_KERNEL_NOLOAD we do our best to use it
> > in-place. For decompression we allocate some space to decompress to.
> 
> Thanks. I am still curious why "kernel" couldn't have been used back then
> with missing entry and load address to arrive at the same result?

Some level or another of historical oversight, yeah.

-- 
Tom

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (660 bytes)