On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 22:42, Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/13/25 9:36 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > Hello everyone, > >>>> Which is different from disagreeing with your specific feedback about >>>> how we get there, to be clear. >> >> And again, since your feedback to this patch was "Don't?", I'm saying we >> need to. But the rest of your feedback was structural on moving towards >> resolving it and so I assume Marek will respond. > > The "blast radius" are these patches, that's all that tripped the tests: > > - boot: android: Always use 8-byte aligned DT with libfdt > - test/py: android: Point fdt command to aligned addresses > - test/py: Use aligned address for overlays in 'extension' test > - sandbox: Fix DT compiler address warnings in sandbox DTs > - sandbox: Fix DT compiler pin warnings in sandbox DTs > - boot: Assure FDT is always at 8-byte aligned address > - arm: qemu: Eliminate fdt_high and initrd_high misuse > - efi_loader: Assure fitImage from capsule is used from 8-byte aligned > address > - MIPS: Assure end of U-Boot is at 8-byte aligned offset > > Regarding last minute alignment, the problem with this android image > seems to be in the android image itself, which packs in badly aligned > FDT. We therefore have to copy it out and realign. Yes, the Android tools do not handle alignment by default. This is stated in the Android docs [1]. Also see [2] on how a boot.img is usually structured. In any case, if DT spec mandates alignement, I think it's good to enforce the spec in the code. [1] https://source.android.com/docs/core/architecture/dto/partitions#cfg-create [2] https://source.android.com/docs/core/architecture/dto > > -- > Best regards, > Marek Vasut
