On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:40:35AM +0100, matthias.schiffer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > The examples in the U-boot docs use "hash-N" as the name for hash nodes. > It seems "hash@N" was used instead at some point during the development of > the FIT format and "hash-N" is more correct; support for "hash@N" is > preserved for backward compatibility. Indeed. dtc lately throughs warnings when a node with a '@' in it doesn't have a reg property. > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > common/image-fit.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/common/image-fit.c b/common/image-fit.c > index dfd1fa02c..356c1ae5d 100644 > --- a/common/image-fit.c > +++ b/common/image-fit.c > @@ -392,7 +392,9 @@ static int fit_verify_hash(struct fit_handle *handle, struct device_node *image, > ret = -EINVAL; > } > > - hash = of_get_child_by_name(image, "hash@1"); > + hash = of_get_child_by_name(image, "hash-1"); > + if (!hash) > + hash = of_get_child_by_name(image, "hash@1"); A few lines below we have the same with: sig_node = of_get_child_by_name(image, "signature@1"); Care to fix this aswell in this patch? Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
