On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 04:35:36PM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:33:20 -0500
> "Mike Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 3, 2008 5:26 PM, Josh Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:15:48 -0500 "Mike Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Jan 3, 2008 5:02 PM, Josh Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > 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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
