Re: erroneous behavior for iMX+GPT

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Am Montag, den 14.10.2019, 14:45 +0200 schrieb s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:30:27PM +0000, Middelschulte, Leif wrote:
> > Hi Sascha,
> > 
> > Am Montag, den 14.10.2019, 14:25 +0200 schrieb Sascha Hauer:
> > > Hi Leif,
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 02:15:39PM +0000, Middelschulte, Leif wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > setting up GPT on an iMX6, I noticed a small bug subject to
> > > > CONFIG_PARTITION_DISK_EFI_GPT_NO_FORCE that leads to unparsed GPTs.
> > > > 
> > > > Background: The iMX supports the mmc user partition as bootmedia
> > > > source too.
> > > > 
> > > > Problem: The (additional) filetype check[0] fails, if the given buffer
> > > > contains multiple, subsequent file(type)s. The buffer might contain
> > > > the beginning of a disk that contains i.e. a Barebox image *and* a
> > > > partition table. The function file_detect_type returns a single (first
> > > > recognized) type[1]. In my case, it returns the Barebox image type.
> > > 
> > > Looks like the file_detect_type() there should be replaced with
> > > file_detect_partition_table().
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > There is a comment about this additional check noting it will be
> > > > mandatory as it will be "[..] added to the EFI Spec. per Intel after
> > > > v1.02.". Anybody can elaborate on that?
> > > > That feedback could help to understand why file_detect_partition_table
> > > > is insufficient in this case.
> > > 
> > > What makes you think that file_detect_partition_table() is insufficient?
> > Nothing makes *me* think it's insufficient. Yet the author explicitly
> > added this *additional* check and did *not* use the suggested
> > alternative function.
> 
> Perhaps because file_detect_partition_table() didn't exist as the efi
> partition parser was added to barebox. Also I would think that
> Jean-Christophe (the original author) didn't encounter these
> ambiguities. It's probably very i.MX specific that a GPT is where the
> barebox header is.
Fair enough. I've created a pull request[0] on GitHub that contains the suggested fix.

[0] https://github.com/saschahauer/barebox/pull/6
> 
> Sascha
> 

Leif
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Embedded]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux