On 10/11/2013 08:54 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
On Thu, 10 Oct 2013, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 10/09/2013 09:59 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
Eh, one correction:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2013, Paul Walmsley wrote:
We could easily wind up with kernels that won't boot at all when used
with newer DT data.
This is a misstatement of the issue: the concern here is that newer
kernels may not boot at all with older DT data - which could easily be in
locked areas of the flash or firmware.
I wonder who would be crazy enough to put DT data into a locked area, and to
what purpose. If you can update the kernel, there is no point locking down DT
data, this will just cause you unnecessary misery.
The DT data will be used by bootloaders also :-(
In situations where the bootloaders are signed and locked, the security
people are also insisting that the DT data be signed and locked.
Oh yea, one additional note you probably have missed. Mike asked us to
fall back to vendor specific bindings at around v6 or so of this set.
Take a look at v8, we have dropped the use of generic bindings, we are
not trying to declare those with this set. This set introduces vendor
specific bindings only, and even these are claimed 'unstable', which
should be enough to discourage people from burning those to OTP type memory.
-Tero
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
