[U-Boot-Users] New Image format: headers hashes.

[Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini <luigi.mantellini@idf-hit.com>]

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