(Resending due to MIME encoding last time. Sorry; I really have to stop using Outlook for this list for some reason)
On 11/08/2011 09:06 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <1320164902-24190-1-git-send-email-swar...@nvidia.com> you wrote: >> image_get_ram_disk() and image_get_kernel() perform operations in a >> consistent order. Modify image_get_fdt() to do things the same way. >> This allows a later change to insert some image header manipulations >> into these three functions in a consistent fashion. ... >> @@ -1131,14 +1131,19 @@ static const image_header_t *image_get_fdt(ulong >> fdt_addr) >> { >> const image_header_t *fdt_hdr = (const image_header_t *)fdt_addr; >> >> - image_print_contents(fdt_hdr); >> + if (!image_check_magic(fdt_hdr)) { >> + fdt_error("fdt header bad magic number\n"); >> + return NULL; >> + } >> >> - puts(" Verifying Checksum ... "); >> if (!image_check_hcrc(fdt_hdr)) { >> fdt_error("fdt header checksum invalid"); >> return NULL; >> } >> >> + image_print_contents(fdt_hdr); >> + >> + puts(" Verifying Checksum ... "); >> if (!image_check_dcrc(fdt_hdr)) { >> fdt_error("fdt checksum invalid"); >> return NULL; > > The rule in U-Boot when generating output is to print a message > before you start an action, and then either print an OK or an error > message. The reason for this is debug support: if neither an OK nor > an error comes you know that the test somehow crashed. > > Here this principle is violated as image_check_magic() and > image_check_hcrc() will run without being announced. > > Please move the output so we get a message printed before starting to > perform the actual tests. The new code is exactly the same as the existing image_get_kernel() and image_get_ramdisk(). Are those wrong? I wouldn't want to fix my patch to conform to some supposed standard when the existing code that's been accepted doesn't conform to that standard, or would I be responsible for fixing up that too? But anyway, I imagine there's no point discussing this patch further, because its sole purpose is to support the uImage load_address=-1 patch that follows, and it's pretty clear that won't be accepted, so please consider this patch series withdrawn too. -- nvpublic _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot