On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote:
> On 21.09.2016 17:12, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 09/20/2016 07:17 PM, Paul Burton wrote:
>>> Commit bac17b78dace ("image-fit: switch ENOLINK to ENOENT") changed
>>> fit_get_node_from_config to return -ENOENT when a property doesn't
>>> exist, but didn't change any of its callers which check return values.
>>> Notably it didn't change boot_get_ramdisk, which leads to U-Boot failing
>>> to boot FIT images which don't include ramdisks with the following
>>> message:
>>>   Ramdisk image is corrupt or invalid
>>> It also didn't take into account that by returning -ENOENT to denote the
>>> lack of a property we lost the ability to determine from the return
>>> value of fit_get_node_from_config whether it was the property or the
>>> configuration node that was missing, which may potentially lead callers
>>> to accept invalid FIT images.
>>> Fix this by having fit_get_node_from_config return -EINVAL when the
>>> configuration node isn't found and -ENOENT when the property isn't
>>> found, which seems to make semantic sense. Callers that previously
>>> checked for -ENOLINK are adjusted to check for -ENOENT, which fixes the
>>> breakage introduced by commit bac17b78dace ("image-fit: switch ENOLINK
>>> to ENOENT").
>>> The only other user of the return fit_get_node_from_config return value,
>>> indirectly, is bootm_find_os which already checked for -ENOENT. From a
>>> read-through of the code I suspect it ought to have been checking for
>>> -ENOLINK prior to bac17b78dace ("image-fit: switch ENOLINK to ENOENT")
>>> anyway, which would make it right after this patch, but this would be
>>> good to get verified by someone who knows this x86 code or is able to
>>> test it.
>>> Signed-off-by: Paul Burton <paul.bur...@imgtec.com>
>>> Cc: Jonathan Gray <j...@jsg.id.au>
>>> Cc: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de>
>> Acked-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de>
> Acked-by: Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de>

Acked-by: George McCollister <george.mccollis...@gmail.com>
Tested-by: George McCollister <george.mccollis...@gmail.com>
U-Boot mailing list

Reply via email to