Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] spl: Use FIT data address as fallback when 'load' property is absent

[Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2632 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 08:47:10AM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2025 at 11:06:11PM +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@ti.com>
> > ---
> > Cc: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
> > 
> > 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 a588d13eb40..c18c98b2959 100644
> > --- a/common/spl/spl_fit.c
> > +++ b/common/spl/spl_fit.c
> > @@ -803,6 +803,8 @@ 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;
> > @@ -893,7 +895,19 @@ 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",
> 
> What's the IH_TYPE here? Saying to use something in-place is not always
> safe.

Looking at the rest of the series, and then going back to v1 and:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/b6bc14fc-c823-4376-939f-2c0e6b120a2c@ti.com/
we're IH_TYPE_STANDALONE which *does* require a load address (see
boot/image-fit.c). You might need to look in to a new type or see if
another type is reasonable, that doesn't already expect a load address
set.

-- 
Tom

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