[PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Dorde Stojicevic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3327 bytes --]

From ae3f90922f5c31bd6198deb149edb9476ecfe4ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 14:48:36 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 Series-to: u-boot@lists.denx.de<mailto:u-boot@lists.denx.de> Series-version: 1
Signed-off-by: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>

Cover-letter:
Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
END
Commit-notes:
Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
END
---
boot/bootm.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/boot/bootm.c b/boot/bootm.c
index 4bdca22ea8c..c90c36a6988 100644
--- a/boot/bootm.c
+++ b/boot/bootm.c
@@ -684,22 +684,19 @@ static int bootm_load_os(struct bootm_headers *images, int boot_progress)
                int ret;

                ret = booti_setup(load, &relocated_addr, &image_size, false);
-               if (ret) {
-                       printf("Failed to prep arm64 kernel (err=%d)\n", ret);
-                       return BOOTM_ERR_RESET;
+               if (ret == 0) {
+                       /* Handle BOOTM_STATE_LOADOS */
+                       if (relocated_addr != load) {
+                               printf("Moving Image from 0x%lx to 0x%lx, end=0x%lx\n",
+                                      load, relocated_addr,
+                                      relocated_addr + image_size);
+                               memmove((void *)relocated_addr, load_buf, image_size);
+                       }
+
+                       images->ep = relocated_addr;
+                       images->os.start = relocated_addr;
+                       images->os.end = relocated_addr + image_size;
                }
-
-               /* Handle BOOTM_STATE_LOADOS */
-               if (relocated_addr != load) {
-                       printf("Moving Image from 0x%lx to 0x%lx, end=0x%lx\n",
-                              load, relocated_addr,
-                              relocated_addr + image_size);
-                       memmove((void *)relocated_addr, load_buf, image_size);
-               }
-
-               images->ep = relocated_addr;
-               images->os.start = relocated_addr;
-               images->os.end = relocated_addr + image_size;
        }

        if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(LMB)) {
--
2.53.0


Dorde Stojicevic

Networks and Cybersecurity

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com



Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Ralf Koenzen
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Mario Paoli
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67


[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Quentin Schulz]

Hi Dorde,

On 2/3/26 4:41 PM, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:
> [You don't often get email from dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> 
>  From ae3f90922f5c31bd6198deb149edb9476ecfe4ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 14:48:36 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 Series-to: u-boot@lists.denx.de<mailto:u-boot@lists.denx.de> Series-version: 1
> Signed-off-by: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
> 
> Cover-letter:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
> Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
> U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
> END
> Commit-notes:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
> Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
> U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
> END

Signed-off-by after the commit log.

Also, this isn't a good enough justification. Why is this actually 
required for booting this hypervisor? Because all this does is...

> ---
> boot/bootm.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/boot/bootm.c b/boot/bootm.c
> index 4bdca22ea8c..c90c36a6988 100644
> --- a/boot/bootm.c
> +++ b/boot/bootm.c
> @@ -684,22 +684,19 @@ static int bootm_load_os(struct bootm_headers *images, int boot_progress)
>                  int ret;
> 
>                  ret = booti_setup(load, &relocated_addr, &image_size, false);
> -               if (ret) {
> -                       printf("Failed to prep arm64 kernel (err=%d)\n", ret);
> -                       return BOOTM_ERR_RESET;

... remove the check on a bad return value, which I'm pretty sure is 
something we don't want to do with such a vague commit log.

So please investigate a bit more and provide more info. Which part of 
booti_setup() call stack actually fails, why? Is there something we can 
or need to do to fix a specific corner case and only that corner case 
without breaking others?

Cheers,
Quentin

Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Tom Rini]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2550 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 03:41:05PM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> From ae3f90922f5c31bd6198deb149edb9476ecfe4ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 14:48:36 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 Series-to: u-boot@lists.denx.de<mailto:u-boot@lists.denx.de> Series-version: 1
> Signed-off-by: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
> 
> Cover-letter:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
> Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
> U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
> END
> Commit-notes:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
> Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
> U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
> END
> ---
> boot/bootm.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

This is an interesting find. And everything Quentin said applies. Also,
the patch as-sent doesn't apply cleanly due to spacing issues, possibly
from copy/paste to your email client?

Now, taking this patch and re-formatting things a bit, if do a "git diff
--ignore-all-space":

diff --git a/boot/bootm.c b/boot/bootm.c
index 4bdca22ea8cf..9743051160ed 100644
--- a/boot/bootm.c
+++ b/boot/bootm.c
@@ -684,11 +684,7 @@ static int bootm_load_os(struct bootm_headers *images, int boot_progress)
 		int ret;
 
 		ret = booti_setup(load, &relocated_addr, &image_size, false);
-		if (ret) {
-			printf("Failed to prep arm64 kernel (err=%d)\n", ret);
-			return BOOTM_ERR_RESET;
-		}
-
+               if (ret == 0) {
                        /* Handle BOOTM_STATE_LOADOS */
                        if (relocated_addr != load) {
                                printf("Moving Image from 0x%lx to 0x%lx, end=0x%lx\n",

Is the interesting part. And you say this is on ARM, so we look at
booti_setup in arch/arm/lib/image.c. The failure cases of the function
is only "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!". So what are you trying to boot
here, and is it really acting like a Linux Kernel "Image" file, which
has a specific magic value? Or are we falling down to this case when we
should not be?

Since it sounds like you can reproduce this rather easily, it might be
good to use "git bisect" to narrow down which exact commit broke your
use case, and we can work from there.

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

RE: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Dorde Stojicevic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5051 bytes --]

Hi guys,

and thanks for your fast response.

Sorry for the formatting issue, I am bound to our company Outlook, which hard-codes our signatures, so this one will not be possible to take out. I am not quite sure git send-email would work, for the same reason + corporate stuff....

Anyhow, an update/clarification on the things going on here (I could/should have sent initially, sorry for that):

1) Lynx Toolchain compiles a FIT Image with the following structure:
	{
		Images{
			Kernel-1 {
				Data=Image;
			}
			Fdt-1 {
				Data=system.dtb;
			}
		}
		Configurations {
			Here kernel-1 and fdt-1 used as default conf-1
		}
	}
2) Data=Image does not have the Magic Code 0x644d5241
3) It is booting with U-Boot SPL 2020.04+g1ccc9d93576+p1 according to Lynx. I haven´t tested myself since we started with 2024.04, and we need it for some other features.
4) Then I investigated differences v2020.04 vs v2024.04, and found this part of code came in.
5) The finding is consistent with last error reported by U-Boot prior to reset "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!"

6) I 1st tried patching the Data=Image in Lynx FIT with the magic code, but it didn’t work.
7) once I patched bootm in U-Boot to skip this part and behaves as in v2020.04 (excluded all restructuring etc.) it booted the Lynx kernel

Basically, v2024.04 correctly detects "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!", as none is there at the moment, but in order to boot Lynx Hypervisor as-is this backward compatibility to v2020.04 is needed.

Does this shine more light on it?

Greetings
Dorde


Dorde Stojicevic

Networks and Cybersecurity

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com



Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Ralf Koenzen
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Mario Paoli
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2026 6:00 PM
To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: *EXT* Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 03:41:05PM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> From ae3f90922f5c31bd6198deb149edb9476ecfe4ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dorde Stojicevic 
> dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwa
> rz.com>
> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 14:48:36 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 
> Series-to: u-boot@lists.denx.de<mailto:u-boot@lists.denx.de> 
> Series-version: 1
> Signed-off-by: Dorde Stojicevic 
> dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwa
> rz.com>
> 
> Cover-letter:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04 Needed in order to boot 
> LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise U-Boot will fail at this position and 
> reset the controller END
> Commit-notes:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04 Needed in order to boot 
> LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise U-Boot will fail at this position and 
> reset the controller END
> ---
> boot/bootm.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

This is an interesting find. And everything Quentin said applies. Also, the patch as-sent doesn't apply cleanly due to spacing issues, possibly from copy/paste to your email client?

Now, taking this patch and re-formatting things a bit, if do a "git diff
--ignore-all-space":

diff --git a/boot/bootm.c b/boot/bootm.c index 4bdca22ea8cf..9743051160ed 100644
--- a/boot/bootm.c
+++ b/boot/bootm.c
@@ -684,11 +684,7 @@ static int bootm_load_os(struct bootm_headers *images, int boot_progress)
 		int ret;
 
 		ret = booti_setup(load, &relocated_addr, &image_size, false);
-		if (ret) {
-			printf("Failed to prep arm64 kernel (err=%d)\n", ret);
-			return BOOTM_ERR_RESET;
-		}
-
+               if (ret == 0) {
                        /* Handle BOOTM_STATE_LOADOS */
                        if (relocated_addr != load) {
                                printf("Moving Image from 0x%lx to 0x%lx, end=0x%lx\n",

Is the interesting part. And you say this is on ARM, so we look at booti_setup in arch/arm/lib/image.c. The failure cases of the function is only "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!". So what are you trying to boot here, and is it really acting like a Linux Kernel "Image" file, which has a specific magic value? Or are we falling down to this case when we should not be?

Since it sounds like you can reproduce this rather easily, it might be good to use "git bisect" to narrow down which exact commit broke your use case, and we can work from there.

--
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Tom Rini]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1815 bytes --]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 12:20:27PM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> and thanks for your fast response.
> 
> Sorry for the formatting issue, I am bound to our company Outlook, which hard-codes our signatures, so this one will not be possible to take out. I am not quite sure git send-email would work, for the same reason + corporate stuff....
> 
> Anyhow, an update/clarification on the things going on here (I could/should have sent initially, sorry for that):
> 
> 1) Lynx Toolchain compiles a FIT Image with the following structure:
> 	{
> 		Images{
> 			Kernel-1 {
> 				Data=Image;
> 			}
> 			Fdt-1 {
> 				Data=system.dtb;
> 			}
> 		}
> 		Configurations {
> 			Here kernel-1 and fdt-1 used as default conf-1
> 		}
> 	}
> 2) Data=Image does not have the Magic Code 0x644d5241
> 3) It is booting with U-Boot SPL 2020.04+g1ccc9d93576+p1 according to Lynx. I haven´t tested myself since we started with 2024.04, and we need it for some other features.
> 4) Then I investigated differences v2020.04 vs v2024.04, and found this part of code came in.
> 5) The finding is consistent with last error reported by U-Boot prior to reset "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!"
> 
> 6) I 1st tried patching the Data=Image in Lynx FIT with the magic code, but it didn’t work.
> 7) once I patched bootm in U-Boot to skip this part and behaves as in v2020.04 (excluded all restructuring etc.) it booted the Lynx kernel
> 
> Basically, v2024.04 correctly detects "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!", as none is there at the moment, but in order to boot Lynx Hypervisor as-is this backward compatibility to v2020.04 is needed.
> 
> Does this shine more light on it?

This is helpful, yes, thanks. Can you provide an "mkimage -l" of one of
these failing to boot FIT images?

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

RE: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Dorde Stojicevic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3850 bytes --]

Hi,

yes of course.

Here it is:

$ mkimage -l build/ed7ct-cb.srp
FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
Created:         Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
 Image 0 (kernel-1)
  Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
  Created:      Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
  Type:         Kernel Image
  Compression:  uncompressed
  Data Size:    262512264 Bytes = 256359.63 KiB = 250.35 MiB
  Architecture: AArch64
  OS:           Linux
  Load Address: 0x40200000
  Entry Point:  0x40200040
 Image 1 (fdt-1)
  Description:  Flattened Device Tree blob for LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
  Created:      Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
  Type:         Flat Device Tree
  Compression:  uncompressed
  Data Size:    79519 Bytes = 77.66 KiB = 0.08 MiB
  Architecture: AArch64
 Default Configuration: 'conf-1'
 Configuration 0 (conf-1)
  Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
  Kernel:       kernel-1
  FDT:          fdt-1

Pls keep me in to loop, I am quite interested in this

Greetings
Dorde


Dorde Stojicevic

Networks and Cybersecurity

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com



Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Ralf Koenzen
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Mario Paoli
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> 
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 2:55 AM
To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: *EXT* Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 12:20:27PM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> and thanks for your fast response.
> 
> Sorry for the formatting issue, I am bound to our company Outlook, which hard-codes our signatures, so this one will not be possible to take out. I am not quite sure git send-email would work, for the same reason + corporate stuff....
> 
> Anyhow, an update/clarification on the things going on here (I could/should have sent initially, sorry for that):
> 
> 1) Lynx Toolchain compiles a FIT Image with the following structure:
> 	{
> 		Images{
> 			Kernel-1 {
> 				Data=Image;
> 			}
> 			Fdt-1 {
> 				Data=system.dtb;
> 			}
> 		}
> 		Configurations {
> 			Here kernel-1 and fdt-1 used as default conf-1
> 		}
> 	}
> 2) Data=Image does not have the Magic Code 0x644d5241
> 3) It is booting with U-Boot SPL 2020.04+g1ccc9d93576+p1 according to Lynx. I haven´t tested myself since we started with 2024.04, and we need it for some other features.
> 4) Then I investigated differences v2020.04 vs v2024.04, and found this part of code came in.
> 5) The finding is consistent with last error reported by U-Boot prior to reset "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!"
> 
> 6) I 1st tried patching the Data=Image in Lynx FIT with the magic code, but it didn’t work.
> 7) once I patched bootm in U-Boot to skip this part and behaves as in 
> v2020.04 (excluded all restructuring etc.) it booted the Lynx kernel
> 
> Basically, v2024.04 correctly detects "Bad Linux ARM64 Image magic!", as none is there at the moment, but in order to boot Lynx Hypervisor as-is this backward compatibility to v2020.04 is needed.
> 
> Does this shine more light on it?

This is helpful, yes, thanks. Can you provide an "mkimage -l" of one of these failing to boot FIT images?

--
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Tom Rini]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 968 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 06:28:39AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> yes of course.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> $ mkimage -l build/ed7ct-cb.srp
> FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created:         Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
>  Image 0 (kernel-1)
>   Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Created:      Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
>   Type:         Kernel Image
>   Compression:  uncompressed
>   Data Size:    262512264 Bytes = 256359.63 KiB = 250.35 MiB
>   Architecture: AArch64
>   OS:           Linux

So, we're getting somewhere. It seems like before our validation check
wasn't working and so claiming to be Linux, but not being Linux, wasn't
caught and failed. The right path here is to add IH_OS_LYNXSECURE to
include/image.h and handling of it in the various boot/ files that need
it. Then the its should have 'os = "lynxsecure"' so that it sets that
field correctly.

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

RE: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Dorde Stojicevic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2650 bytes --]

Nice. 😊

From what I know, Lynx wanted the "feature" of being able to impersonate Linux, so once it´s builtin between real OS and U-Boot, it is a no-brainer with "nothing to be changed".

But it seems like that detection in U-Boot was not working properly, then Lynx built on top (unaware of the check that needed to be inplace), and then I came with my "quick´n´dirty" solution. 😊

Maybe the really-proper-solution would be that Lynx just does the complete proper impersonation of Linux, if that is what they really want as a feature. But to clarify this, we would need some one from their side. I have contact with them, should I establish a trilateral talk on this topic?

Greetings and nice weekend
Dorde


Dorde Stojicevic

Networks and Cybersecurity

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com



Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Ralf Koenzen
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Mario Paoli
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> 
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 4:04 PM
To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: *EXT* Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 06:28:39AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> yes of course.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> $ mkimage -l build/ed7ct-cb.srp
> FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created:         Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
>  Image 0 (kernel-1)
>   Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Created:      Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
>   Type:         Kernel Image
>   Compression:  uncompressed
>   Data Size:    262512264 Bytes = 256359.63 KiB = 250.35 MiB
>   Architecture: AArch64
>   OS:           Linux

So, we're getting somewhere. It seems like before our validation check wasn't working and so claiming to be Linux, but not being Linux, wasn't caught and failed. The right path here is to add IH_OS_LYNXSECURE to include/image.h and handling of it in the various boot/ files that need it. Then the its should have 'os = "lynxsecure"' so that it sets that field correctly.

--
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Tom Rini]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 904 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 03:17:15PM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> Nice. 😊
> 
> From what I know, Lynx wanted the "feature" of being able to impersonate Linux, so once it´s builtin between real OS and U-Boot, it is a no-brainer with "nothing to be changed".
> 
> But it seems like that detection in U-Boot was not working properly, then Lynx built on top (unaware of the check that needed to be inplace), and then I came with my "quick´n´dirty" solution. 😊
> 
> Maybe the really-proper-solution would be that Lynx just does the complete proper impersonation of Linux, if that is what they really want as a feature. But to clarify this, we would need some one from their side. I have contact with them, should I establish a trilateral talk on this topic?

Yes, it would be great if someone from Lynx could chime in and we can
all work to solve the problem here. Thanks!

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

RE: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Dorde Stojicevic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3673 bytes --]

Hi all,

sorry that it took a while to get the response from Lynx but it couldn´t be helped unfortunately.

I got the response from Lynx:

" Hello Dorde.

I’ve got a replay from our engineering team. We do not support u-boot, so we don’t have any plans to make SRP “ARM64 kernel“ compatible.

We work with board with default u-boot (for now it is U-Boot SPL 2020.04).

So, you are free to make any changes in u-boot to make SRP run in newest version of u-boot.
"

I am a bit surprised by the response that they don´t seem really interested in it, but it is how it is. So we are free to apply the patch to our liking.

Let me know how we proceed from here
Dorde


Dorde Stojicevic

Networks and Cybersecurity

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com



Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Ralf Koenzen
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Mario Paoli
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67



-----Original Message-----
From: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) 
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 4:17 PM
To: 'Tom Rini' <trini@konsulko.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: RE: *EXT* Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

Nice. 😊

From what I know, Lynx wanted the "feature" of being able to impersonate Linux, so once it´s builtin between real OS and U-Boot, it is a no-brainer with "nothing to be changed".

But it seems like that detection in U-Boot was not working properly, then Lynx built on top (unaware of the check that needed to be inplace), and then I came with my "quick´n´dirty" solution. 😊

Maybe the really-proper-solution would be that Lynx just does the complete proper impersonation of Linux, if that is what they really want as a feature. But to clarify this, we would need some one from their side. I have contact with them, should I establish a trilateral talk on this topic?

Greetings and nice weekend
Dorde

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> 
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 4:04 PM
To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: *EXT* Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 06:28:39AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> yes of course.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> $ mkimage -l build/ed7ct-cb.srp
> FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created:         Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
>  Image 0 (kernel-1)
>   Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Created:      Thu Feb  5 13:58:31 2026
>   Type:         Kernel Image
>   Compression:  uncompressed
>   Data Size:    262512264 Bytes = 256359.63 KiB = 250.35 MiB
>   Architecture: AArch64
>   OS:           Linux

So, we're getting somewhere. It seems like before our validation check wasn't working and so claiming to be Linux, but not being Linux, wasn't caught and failed. The right path here is to add IH_OS_LYNXSECURE to include/image.h and handling of it in the various boot/ files that need it. Then the its should have 'os = "lynxsecure"' so that it sets that field correctly.

--
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Tom Rini]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1249 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 07:30:13AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> sorry that it took a while to get the response from Lynx but it couldn´t be helped unfortunately.
> 
> I got the response from Lynx:
> 
> " Hello Dorde.
> 
> I’ve got a replay from our engineering team. We do not support u-boot, so we don’t have any plans to make SRP “ARM64 kernel“ compatible.
> 
> We work with board with default u-boot (for now it is U-Boot SPL 2020.04).
> 
> So, you are free to make any changes in u-boot to make SRP run in newest version of u-boot.
> "
> 
> I am a bit surprised by the response that they don´t seem really interested in it, but it is how it is. So we are free to apply the patch to our liking.
> 
> Let me know how we proceed from here

Well, if they aren't going to do the work, someone needs to do the work
to support the OS. What's happened since 2020.04 is that we now
correctly detect and fail something that claims to be a Linux ARM64
Image, but is not. We aren't going to go back and re-allow that, it was
a bug.

The proposal I outlined for how I think it should look, for proper
support, is something that I hope someone interested / motivated can
look in to doing.

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Dorde Stojicevic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4235 bytes --]

Hi all,

yup, I completely understand and agree with you.

One way would be to detect the characteristic string Lynx has in the beginning of the FIT image " eLynxSecure" :

mkimage:
FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
Created:         Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
 Image 0 (kernel-1)
  Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
  Created:      Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
  Type:         Kernel Image
  Compression:  uncompressed
  Data Size:    
  Architecture: AArch64
  OS:           Linux
  Load Address: 
  Entry Point:  
 Image 1 (fdt-1)
  Description:  Flattened Device Tree blob for LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
  Created:      Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
  Type:         Flat Device Tree
  Compression:  uncompressed
  Data Size:    
  Architecture: AArch64
 Default Configuration: 'conf-1'
 Configuration 0 (conf-1)
  Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
  Kernel:       kernel-1
  FDT:          fdt-1

xxd -l 128
00000000: d00d feed 1dea 3bd5 0000 0030 1dea 3b64  ......;....0..;d
00000010: 0000 0030 0000 0011 0000 0010 0000 0000  ...0............
00000020: 0000 0071 1dea 3b34 0000 0000 0000 0000  ...q..;4........
00000030: 0000 0001 0000 0000 0000 0003 0000 002e  ................
00000040: 0000 0065 4c79 6e78 5365 6375 7265 2032  ...eLynxSecure 2
00000050: 3032 352e 3130 2e30 2d33 3938 3434 6238  025.10.0-39844b8
00000060: 3065 3020 5352 5020 2861 6172 6368 3634  0e0 SRP (aarch64
00000070: 2900 0000 0000 0003 0000 0004 0000 0056  )..............V

Thing is I am currently pretty busy with other stuff, so wont be able to commit myself to it at the moment.
Maybe you can work out a proper solution, based on info I provided.
To my understanding, shouldn’t actually be that complex, e.g. just add check for eLynxSecure in the code location where my patch is.
But may be I don’t see the whole picture of U-Boot and missing something.

Let me know if I can be of help somehow
Dj


Dorde Stojicevic

Networks and Cybersecurity

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com



Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Ralf Koenzen
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Mario Paoli
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2026 11:24 PM
To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: *EXT* Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 07:30:13AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> sorry that it took a while to get the response from Lynx but it couldn´t be helped unfortunately.
> 
> I got the response from Lynx:
> 
> " Hello Dorde.
> 
> I’ve got a replay from our engineering team. We do not support u-boot, so we don’t have any plans to make SRP “ARM64 kernel“ compatible.
> 
> We work with board with default u-boot (for now it is U-Boot SPL 2020.04).
> 
> So, you are free to make any changes in u-boot to make SRP run in newest version of u-boot.
> "
> 
> I am a bit surprised by the response that they don´t seem really interested in it, but it is how it is. So we are free to apply the patch to our liking.
> 
> Let me know how we proceed from here

Well, if they aren't going to do the work, someone needs to do the work to support the OS. What's happened since 2020.04 is that we now correctly detect and fail something that claims to be a Linux ARM64 Image, but is not. We aren't going to go back and re-allow that, it was a bug.

The proposal I outlined for how I think it should look, for proper support, is something that I hope someone interested / motivated can look in to doing.

--
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Tom Rini]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2358 bytes --]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 08:15:14AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> yup, I completely understand and agree with you.
> 
> One way would be to detect the characteristic string Lynx has in the beginning of the FIT image " eLynxSecure" :
> 
> mkimage:
> FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created:         Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
>  Image 0 (kernel-1)
>   Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Created:      Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
>   Type:         Kernel Image
>   Compression:  uncompressed
>   Data Size:    
>   Architecture: AArch64
>   OS:           Linux
>   Load Address: 
>   Entry Point:  
>  Image 1 (fdt-1)
>   Description:  Flattened Device Tree blob for LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Created:      Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
>   Type:         Flat Device Tree
>   Compression:  uncompressed
>   Data Size:    
>   Architecture: AArch64
>  Default Configuration: 'conf-1'
>  Configuration 0 (conf-1)
>   Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Kernel:       kernel-1
>   FDT:          fdt-1
> 
> xxd -l 128
> 00000000: d00d feed 1dea 3bd5 0000 0030 1dea 3b64  ......;....0..;d
> 00000010: 0000 0030 0000 0011 0000 0010 0000 0000  ...0............
> 00000020: 0000 0071 1dea 3b34 0000 0000 0000 0000  ...q..;4........
> 00000030: 0000 0001 0000 0000 0000 0003 0000 002e  ................
> 00000040: 0000 0065 4c79 6e78 5365 6375 7265 2032  ...eLynxSecure 2
> 00000050: 3032 352e 3130 2e30 2d33 3938 3434 6238  025.10.0-39844b8
> 00000060: 3065 3020 5352 5020 2861 6172 6368 3634  0e0 SRP (aarch64
> 00000070: 2900 0000 0000 0003 0000 0004 0000 0056  )..............V
> 
> Thing is I am currently pretty busy with other stuff, so wont be able to commit myself to it at the moment.
> Maybe you can work out a proper solution, based on info I provided.
> To my understanding, shouldn’t actually be that complex, e.g. just add check for eLynxSecure in the code location where my patch is.
> But may be I don’t see the whole picture of U-Boot and missing something.
> 
> Let me know if I can be of help somehow

I was suggesting adding a new IH_OS type because otherwise we're going
to be opening ourselves up to invalid (or malicious) images being passed
in. Thanks!

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Dorde Stojicevic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3810 bytes --]

Hi Tom,

I have news regarding this.

It became an important point at Lynx, so Patrick from Lynx (or a another assigned colleague) will get in touch with you to sort this out.

I already discussed the solution proposed by you (therefore forwarding the e-mails below) and we see no technical problem with implementing like this.

Pls keep me in the loop as I would be interested in the final implementation as well, for the purpose of my project.

Thanks and talk to you soon
Dj


Dorde Stojicevic

Technology Systems

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com



Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Dino Huber 
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Markus Dolfen
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> 
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2026 4:27 PM
To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: *EXT* Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 08:15:14AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> yup, I completely understand and agree with you.
> 
> One way would be to detect the characteristic string Lynx has in the beginning of the FIT image " eLynxSecure" :
> 
> mkimage:
> FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created:         Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
>  Image 0 (kernel-1)
>   Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Created:      Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
>   Type:         Kernel Image
>   Compression:  uncompressed
>   Data Size:    
>   Architecture: AArch64
>   OS:           Linux
>   Load Address: 
>   Entry Point:  
>  Image 1 (fdt-1)
>   Description:  Flattened Device Tree blob for LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Created:      Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
>   Type:         Flat Device Tree
>   Compression:  uncompressed
>   Data Size:    
>   Architecture: AArch64
>  Default Configuration: 'conf-1'
>  Configuration 0 (conf-1)
>   Description:  LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
>   Kernel:       kernel-1
>   FDT:          fdt-1
> 
> xxd -l 128
> 00000000: d00d feed 1dea 3bd5 0000 0030 1dea 3b64  ......;....0..;d
> 00000010: 0000 0030 0000 0011 0000 0010 0000 0000  ...0............
> 00000020: 0000 0071 1dea 3b34 0000 0000 0000 0000  ...q..;4........
> 00000030: 0000 0001 0000 0000 0000 0003 0000 002e  ................
> 00000040: 0000 0065 4c79 6e78 5365 6375 7265 2032  ...eLynxSecure 2
> 00000050: 3032 352e 3130 2e30 2d33 3938 3434 6238  025.10.0-39844b8
> 00000060: 3065 3020 5352 5020 2861 6172 6368 3634  0e0 SRP (aarch64
> 00000070: 2900 0000 0000 0003 0000 0004 0000 0056  )..............V
> 
> Thing is I am currently pretty busy with other stuff, so wont be able to commit myself to it at the moment.
> Maybe you can work out a proper solution, based on info I provided.
> To my understanding, shouldn’t actually be that complex, e.g. just add check for eLynxSecure in the code location where my patch is.
> But may be I don’t see the whole picture of U-Boot and missing something.
> 
> Let me know if I can be of help somehow

I was suggesting adding a new IH_OS type because otherwise we're going to be opening ourselves up to invalid (or malicious) images being passed in. Thanks!

--
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Patrick Deiber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5185 bytes --]

Hello,

Thanks. I will share the contacts to our product team.

Regards,
Patrick


__

Patrick Deiber

Technical Account Manager, EMEA

[https://www.lynx.com/hubfs/email-signature-cellphone2.png] +49 171 81 34 540

[https://www.lynx.com/hubfs/email-signature-location2.png] Germany

[https://www.lynx.com/hubfs/email-signature-globe2.png] www.lynx.com<https://www.lynx.com/>

[YouTube]<https://www.youtube.com/@lynxsoftwaretechnologies>[LinkedIn]<https://linkedin.com/company/lynxsoftwaretechnologies>

[Lynx Logo]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information contained in this transmission may be privileged and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Thank you.

________________________________
From: Dorde Stojicevic <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Sent: Friday, 31 July 2026 08:46
To: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de <u-boot@lists.denx.de>; Patrick Deiber <pdeiber@lynx.com>
Subject: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

Hi Tom,

I have news regarding this.

It became an important point at Lynx, so Patrick from Lynx (or a another assigned colleague) will get in touch with you to sort this out.

I already discussed the solution proposed by you (therefore forwarding the e-mails below) and we see no technical problem with implementing like this.

Pls keep me in the loop as I would be interested in the final implementation as well, for the purpose of my project.

Thanks and talk to you soon
Dj


Dorde Stojicevic

Technology Systems

Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH
Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany
Phone: +4971169945195

Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com<https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/>

[cid:DF7F3780CBD74D75@A9C3C673EA6C2A40]

Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Dino Huber
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Markus Dolfen
Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart
Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283
Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2026 4:27 PM
To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>; u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: *EXT* Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature***

On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 08:15:14AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> yup, I completely understand and agree with you.
>
> One way would be to detect the characteristic string Lynx has in the beginning of the FIT image " eLynxSecure" :
>
> mkimage:
> FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created: Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
> Image 0 (kernel-1)
> Description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created: Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
> Type: Kernel Image
> Compression: uncompressed
> Data Size:
> Architecture: AArch64
> OS: Linux
> Load Address:
> Entry Point:
> Image 1 (fdt-1)
> Description: Flattened Device Tree blob for LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Created: Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026
> Type: Flat Device Tree
> Compression: uncompressed
> Data Size:
> Architecture: AArch64
> Default Configuration: 'conf-1'
> Configuration 0 (conf-1)
> Description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64)
> Kernel: kernel-1
> FDT: fdt-1
>
> xxd -l 128
> 00000000: d00d feed 1dea 3bd5 0000 0030 1dea 3b64 ......;....0..;d
> 00000010: 0000 0030 0000 0011 0000 0010 0000 0000 ...0............
> 00000020: 0000 0071 1dea 3b34 0000 0000 0000 0000 ...q..;4........
> 00000030: 0000 0001 0000 0000 0000 0003 0000 002e ................
> 00000040: 0000 0065 4c79 6e78 5365 6375 7265 2032 ...eLynxSecure 2
> 00000050: 3032 352e 3130 2e30 2d33 3938 3434 6238 025.10.0-39844b8
> 00000060: 3065 3020 5352 5020 2861 6172 6368 3634 0e0 SRP (aarch64
> 00000070: 2900 0000 0000 0003 0000 0004 0000 0056 )..............V
>
> Thing is I am currently pretty busy with other stuff, so wont be able to commit myself to it at the moment.
> Maybe you can work out a proper solution, based on info I provided.
> To my understanding, shouldn’t actually be that complex, e.g. just add check for eLynxSecure in the code location where my patch is.
> But may be I don’t see the whole picture of U-Boot and missing something.
>
> Let me know if I can be of help somehow

I was suggesting adding a new IH_OS type because otherwise we're going to be opening ourselves up to invalid (or malicious) images being passed in. Thanks!

--
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9150 bytes --]

Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Tom Rini]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 697 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 04:03:58PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Dorde,
> 
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 at 06:06, Dorde Stojicevic
> <dorde.stojicevic@rohde-schwarz.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > and thanks for your fast response.
> >
> > Sorry for the formatting issue, I am bound to our company Outlook, which hard-codes our signatures, so this one will not be possible to take out. I am not quite sure git send-email would work, for the same reason + corporate stuff....
> >
> 
> Patman supports the b4 relay now so you could try that. It just needs
> a simple registration step.

It would be best to not confuse things however, and just use b4, with
the b4 relay.

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]