Wolfgang Denk wd at denx.de
Sat Sep 7 11:51:49 UTC 2019

Dear Patrick,

In message <1567530547-14331-1-git-send-email-patrick.delaunay at st.com> you wrote:
> Add a new flag CONFIG_ENV_SUPPORT to compile all
> the environment features in U-Boot (attributes, callbacks
> and flags). It is the equivalent of the 2 existing flags

I think this is a bda name, as it is misleading.  It sounds as if it
is used to enable the support of environment vaiables at all, which
it does not - instead it only enables / disables a few specific
extended features.  This must be reflected in the name.


This scares me.  Why are there different settings for SPL, TPL and
U-Boot proper?  This looks conceptually broken to me - if a system
is configured to use a specific set of environment features and
extensions, then the exact same settings must be use in all of SPL,
TPL and U-Boot proper.

I understand that it may be desirable for example to reduce the size
of the SPL by omitting some environment extensions, but provide
these in U-Boot proper, but this is broken and dangerous.  For
example, U-Boot flags are often used to enforce a certain level of
security (say, by making environment variables read-only or such).
The same level of handling and protection must also be maintained in
SPL and TPL.

So please reconsider this whole implementation, and make sure that
only a single macro ise used everywhere to enable these features.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Never ascribe to malice that which can  adequately  be  explained  by

More information about the U-Boot mailing list