Hi Aristo, On Mon, 29 Sept 2025 at 08:20, Aristo Chen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Simon > > Simon Glass <[email protected]> 於 2025年9月26日 週五 下午10:49寫道： > > > > Hi Aristo, > > > > On Thu, 25 Sept 2025 at 07:50, Aristo Chen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Aristo Chen <[email protected]> 於 2025年9月24日 週三 下午10:33寫道： > > > > > > > > Nishanth Menon <[email protected]> 於 2025年9月24日 週三 下午10:05寫道： > > > > > > > > > > On 07:51-20250924, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 06:31:23AM -0700, E Shattow wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Aristo, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/24/25 04:43, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > > > > > > > On 06:37-20250924, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 10:59-20250914, Aristo Chen wrote: > > > > > > > >>> This patch series enhances FIT image robustness by adding > > > > > > > >>> **memory > > > > > > > >>> region overlap detection** to `mkimage` and fixing existing > > > > > > > >>> overlaps > > > > > > > >>> in DTS files and `binman` tests. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Looks like i see a build regression in linux-next after this > > > > > > > >> series. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I fat fingered that one.. sorry, I meant u-boot next. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fails at commit 4d84fa1261eb, last pass was on commit > > > > > > > > d81c1118580f > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> https://gist.github.com/nmenon/b2fc9e7680cc296062c7dced94105f76 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe there are outstanding comments on V1 that have'nt > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > addressed either. Can we revert/drop this series for now while > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > comments are addressed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Similar to Nishanth, I am seeing a build regression, itb.map: > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the noise all, I've reverted this in next now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Tom. > > > > > -- > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Nishanth Menon > > > > > Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3 > > > > > 1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D > > > > > https://ti.com/opensource > > > > > > > > Apology for introducing the regression, I will find time to fix them, > > > > and thanks Tom for reverting my patch set to unblock others > > > > > > > > For TIFS stub entries on AM6x platforms and the starfive visionfive2, > > > > sounds like the image in the FIT will be selected during the runtime, > > > > so they are not really overlapping each other. I will need to figure > > > > out other way instead > > > > > > > > > Thank you all for the feedback on my FIT image overlap detection patch > > > series, and apology again for the issues that I introduced > > > > > > Currently what I have in my mind is to have the following 2 changes in > > > my patch set > > > ### 1. Add support for mutually exclusive image groups > > > Some platforms load only one image from a group at runtime. In the > > > device tree, we may have something like this > > > ``` > > > tifsstub-hs { > > > // ... existing properties ... > > > mutually-exclusive-group = "tifsstub"; > > > }; > > > tifsstub-fs { > > > // ... existing properties ... > > > mutually-exclusive-group = "tifsstub"; > > > }; > > > ``` > > > The overlap checker would then skip validation between images in the > > > same mutually-exclusive-group, while still catching genuine > > > overlaps > > > > > > ### 2. Change from build error to warning > > > Given that there may be edge cases(such as > > > starfive_visionfive2_defconfig) not covered by current CI pipelines, > > > changing overlap > > > detection from a build-stopping error to a warning initially. This would: > > > - Alert developers to potential memory layout issues > > > - Avoid breaking existing working configurations > > > - Allow time to refine the detection logic based on community feedback > > > - Enable a gradual transition to stricter validation once the approach is > > > proven > > > The warning could later become an error once we have confidence in the > > > detection accuracy across all supported platforms. > > > > > > Feel free to let me know if you have any concerns or suggestions > > > > We should try to have discussions on FIT on the spec github as well, > > e.g. filing an issue at [1] and referring to it here. I'm not sure how > > to link github discussions to a mailing list, so that perhaps just > > create an issue?. FIT is used by most firmware projects at this point, > > many of which don't follow this mailing list. > > > > Regards, > > Simon > > I just opend an issue[1] in the github repo, I don't know if we should > continue the discussion there or should > we continue the discussion here in parallel?
I don't know if it is possible to cc the mailing list from github or vice versa. Probably the important thing is to have an issue so non-U-Boot people can see it (as you have done with [1]). For now I've added a comment on your issue. > > Best Regards, > Aristo > > [1] https://github.com/open-source-firmware/flat-image-tree/issues/32 > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your time and guidance! > > > Aristo > > > > [1] https://github.com/open-source-firmware/flat-image-tree/issues
