[PATCH v4 01/11] spl: Use FIT data address as fallback when 'load' property is absent

[Tom Rini]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 04:26:31PM +0530, Beleswar Prasad Padhi wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> On 28/04/26 01:24, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 25, 2026 at 09:07:32AM +0530, Beleswar Padhi wrote:
> >> In cases where the 'load' property is not defined in a FIT image node,
> >> fallback to using the data address returned by `fit_image_get_data()`.
> >> This enables FIT images to omit the 'load' property during FIT creation.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi at ti.com>
> >> ---
> >> Cc: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> >>
> >> v4: Changelog:
> >> 1. None
> >>
> >> Link to v3:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251231173621.1069988-2-b-padhi@ti.com/
> >>
> >> v3: Changelog:
> >> 1. None
> >>
> >> Link to v2:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250506104202.16741-3-b-padhi@ti.com/
> >>
> >> v2: Changelog:
> >> 1. New patch. Add support to load images without 'load' property.
> >>
> >>  common/spl/spl_fit.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> >>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/common/spl/spl_fit.c b/common/spl/spl_fit.c
> >> index 46ebcabe56a..87d01b8b8e6 100644
> >> --- a/common/spl/spl_fit.c
> >> +++ b/common/spl/spl_fit.c
> >> @@ -799,6 +799,8 @@ int spl_load_simple_fit(struct spl_image_info *spl_image,
> >>  {
> >>  	struct spl_image_info image_info;
> >>  	struct spl_fit_info ctx;
> >> +	const void *fit_image_loadaddr;
> >> +	size_t fit_image_size;
> >>  	int node = -1;
> >>  	int ret;
> >>  	int index = 0;
> >> @@ -889,7 +891,19 @@ int spl_load_simple_fit(struct spl_image_info *spl_image,
> >>  		if (firmware_node == node)
> >>  			continue;
> >>  
> >> -		image_info.load_addr = 0;
> >> +		/*
> >> +		 * If the 'load' property is not present in the image node,
> >> +		 * use the FIT image's data address as the fallback load
> >> +		 * address. This allows flexibility in omitting the load address
> >> +		 * during FIT creation time.
> >> +		 */
> >> +		ret = fit_image_get_data(ctx.fit, node,
> >> +					 &fit_image_loadaddr, &fit_image_size);
> >> +		if (ret < 0)
> >> +			panic("Error accessing node = %d in FIT (%d)\n", node,
> >> +			      ret);
> >> +
> >> +		image_info.load_addr = (ulong)fit_image_loadaddr;
> >>  		ret = load_simple_fit(info, offset, &ctx, node, &image_info);
> >>  		if (ret < 0 && ret != -EBADSLT) {
> >>  			printf("%s: can't load image loadables index %d (ret = %d)\n",
> > I guess the real question here is, does the spec allow this to be
> > omitted like that?
> 
> 
> Could you please point me to the spec? I could not find it.

Sure: https://github.com/open-source-firmware/flat-image-tree/

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20260428/ad712c32/attachment.sig>