[PATCH 2/6] ARM: zImage: Allow the appending of a device tree binary
Dave Martin
dave.martin at linaro.org
Wed Sep 14 12:10:20 EDT 2011
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:10:44AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:04:28AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> > >
[...]
> > > > Do we worry that garbage in memory after the zImage might match this
> > > > magic number?
> > > >
> > > > For example, if an ordinary userspace program allocates a huge number
> > > > of pages and fills them with bogus device tree headers, is there a chance
> > > > that the those headers could remain in memory across a reboot?
> > >
> > > In theory this _could_ be possible. However I don't expect this feature
> > > to be enabled if you are not going to actually use it, especially in a
> > > production setup. If you are not appending a DTB to your kernel then
> > > there is simply no point keeping this config option set (normally you
> > > should use this option only because you have no other choices).
> >
> > That seems reasonable.
> >
> > Should we document this recommendation, in the Kconfig help or
> > Documentation/?
>
> I'll add some scary wording to the help text, and make it depend on
> EXPERIMENTAL as well. I prefer not to impose some expectations on the
> zImage layout for this even if not in use, like being stuck with an
> offset that we'll always have to guard against corruption due to people
> blindly scripting the zImage poking you suggested even when it is not
> needed.
>
> People will find ways to screw it up if they really want to anyway. So
> I'd lean towards keeping this simple and not create any legacy around
> this hopefully temporary accommodation feature.
Yeah, sure -- I think documentating it is enough for now.
And I agree we don't really want to reinvent the rdev nastiness for zImages...
Cheers
---Dave
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list