On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 08:36:35AM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 04:12:39PM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> > On 09.06.22 16:10, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 03:09:36PM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> > >> Fastboot would fall back to a raw copy even for bbu- partitions if
> > >> no barebox_update handler was found. Prevent this by bailing out
> > >> with an error code.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> ---
> > >> v2 -> v3:
> > >> - bail out instead of only printing message and falling back
> > >> to raw copy (Sascha)
> > >> v1 -> v2:
> > >> - print message in case barebox_update handler is not found
> > >> ---
> > >> common/fastboot.c | 9 +++++++--
> > >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/common/fastboot.c b/common/fastboot.c
> > >> index 330a06f5a32f..a5cf04b39ecd 100644
> > >> --- a/common/fastboot.c
> > >> +++ b/common/fastboot.c
> > >> @@ -683,8 +683,13 @@ static void cb_flash(struct fastboot *fb, const char *cmd)
> > >> };
> > >>
> > >> handler = bbu_find_handler_by_device(data.devicefile);
> > >> - if (!handler)
> > >> - goto copy;
> > >> + if (!handler) {
> > >> + fastboot_tx_print(fb, FASTBOOT_MSG_FAIL,
> > >> + "No barebox update handler registered for %s",
> > >> + data.devicefile);
> > >> + ret = -ENOENT;
> > >> + goto out;
> > >> + }
> > >
> > > I didn't verify that, but I believe a full raw bootable disk image
> > > generated for i.MX will be detected as barebox image. With this patch we
> > > wouldn't be able to flash that anymore.
> >
> > Can we just apply v2 and see how often we see the message?
>
> Or maybe the 'is a barebox image' detection is not strict enough? We know
> the image size, right? Is there a way to determine the size of the actual
> barebox image? If the two differ then it's not a barebox image after all.
filetype_is_barebox_image() looks like this:
bool filetype_is_barebox_image(enum filetype ft)
{
switch (ft) {
case filetype_arm_barebox:
case filetype_mips_barebox:
case filetype_ch_image:
case filetype_ch_image_be:
case filetype_layerscape_image:
case filetype_layerscape_qspi_image:
case filetype_stm32_image_fsbl_v1:
case filetype_fip:
return true;
default:
return false;
}
}
There's likely a way to determine the size for some of the images, but
probably not for all.
We could check the size of the image. If it's too big for a barebox
image then it is none. I don't have a very good feeling about such a
heuristic though.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
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
