[U-Boot-Users] New Image format: headers hashes.
Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
luigi.mantellini at idf-hit.com
Thu Mar 27 23:26:26 CET 2008
Continuing my monologue:
An observation about the fit_image_check_hashes and fit_image_set_hashes
functions:
- The hashes protect only the data sections of the image nodes...
ignoring the others fields (like "load", "entry", etc...). I don't like
this :S I think that the hash values must protect all fields of a node
(like the "old" image format).
to be continue...
ciao
luigi
On gio, 2008-03-27 at 17:06 +0100, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini wrote:
> On gio, 2008-03-27 at 12:13 +0100, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini wrote:
> >
> >
> > - The mkimage calculate hashes before that timestamp is added to
> > image.
> > is it better exchange the order of these operations (before add
> > timestamp then calculate hashes)?
> > - Does the new format assure that the complete image (_all_
> > sections,
> > images, ramdisks, configurations, blobs) are covered by at least an
> > hash
> > value? should mkimage add at least a hash value for the root node?
> >
>
> In addition to the previous question:
>
> - I'm interested to calculate and store from U-boot code but the
> fit_image_set_hashes is compiled only when the USE_HOSTCC symbol is
> defined. Why? Is there a particular reason? I think that a lot of
> useful functions (ifdef-ed by USE_HOSTCC) should be available also in
> u-boot code, anyway the linker will drop the unused functions.
>
>
> Any comments?
>
> thanks
>
> luigi
--
______ Luigi Mantellini
.'______'. R&D - Software
(.' '.) Industrie Dial Face S.p.A.
( :=----=: ) Via Canzo, 4
('.______.') 20068 Peschiera Borromeo (MI), Italy
'.______.' Tel.: +39 02 5167 2813
Fax: +39 02 5167 2459
Ind. Dial Face Email: luigi.mantellini at idf-hit.com
www.idf-hit.com GPG fingerprint: 3DD1 7B71 FBDF 6376 1B4A
B003 175F E979 907E 1650
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list