Re: [PATCH 1/3] Merge mkubootimg tool for building U-Boot images

[Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>]

On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 04:35:36PM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:33:20 -0500
> "Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Jan 3, 2008 5:26 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:15:48 -0500 "Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jan 3, 2008 5:02 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > > > Several platforms require the mkimage tool to generate a uImage file that is
> > > > > used with U-Boot.  This brings the mkimage tool in-kernel to enable building
> > > > > those platforms without having mkimage externally provided.  The tool is named
> > > > > mkubootimg for better clarity.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is currently based off of the version found in U-Boot 1.3.1.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  scripts/Makefile             |    1
> > > > >  scripts/mkubootimg/Makefile  |    6
> > > > >  scripts/mkubootimg/crc32.c   |  199 +++++++++++
> > > > >  scripts/mkubootimg/mkimage.c |  728 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >  scripts/mkubootimg/sha1.c    |  413 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >  scripts/mkubootimg/sha1.h    |  115 ++++++
> > > > >  scripts/mkubootimg/uimage.h  |  161 +++++++++
> > > > >  7 files changed, 1623 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > i'm fairly certain sha1 is not needed.  the u-boot makefile has a bug
> > > > in the 1.3.1 release where mkimage depends on sha1.o but doesnt
> > > > actually use sha1 functions.  i posted a patch to u-boot mailing list
> > > > to get this dropped.  regardless, no need for the kernel to import it.
> > >
> > > No need to yet anyway.  There are discussions on-going to make a new
> > > image format that can do sha1 sums instead of crc32.  Either way is
> > > fine with me, I just opted to include it now to keep it the same as
> > > U-Boot and avoid having to include it in the future.
> > >
> > > If you want an updated patch with the sha1 code removed, I can do
> > > that.  Sam, Wolfgang?
> > 
> > yes, but i think the next image format is going to require quite a bit
> > of changes in the build system anyways, especially since with the
> > kernel you will want the option to produce either format, so simply
> > dropping the sha1 makes sense to me.  but i dont really care either
> > way, just making sure you're aware of the issue (and it sounds like
> > you are).
> 
> Yep, I am.  I plan on maintaining the in-kernel version too, as most
> of the PPC 44x boards these days use U-Boot.  So I'll be sure to keep on
> top of things.

We do not want sha1.* files around because we expect them to be used. So I 
dropped those.
Otherwise I applied all three patches.
I will await one day for ack's from Russell and Paulus before
I push out the tree.

	Sam