[PATCH v2 1/2] of/fdt: export fdt blob as /sys/firmware/fdt

Ard Biesheuvel ard.biesheuvel at linaro.org
Wed Nov 12 04:08:29 PST 2014

On 12 November 2014 13:01, Grant Likely <grant.likely at linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Ard Biesheuvel
> <ard.biesheuvel at linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 12 November 2014 12:45, Grant Likely <grant.likely at linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
>>> <ard.biesheuvel at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> On 11 November 2014 21:08, Grant Likely <grant.likely at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 19:47:01 +0100
>>>>>>> , Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel at linaro.org>
>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>> Create a new /sys entry '/sys/firmware/fdt' to export the FDT blob
>>>>>>>> that was passed to the kernel by the bootloader. This allows userland
>>>>>>>> applications such as kexec to access the raw binary. The blob needs to
>>>>>>>> be preserved as early as possible by calling preserve_fdt().
>>>>>>>> The fact that this node does not reside under /sys/firmware/device-tree
>>>>>>>> is deliberate: FDT is also used on arm64 UEFI/ACPI systems to
>>>>>>>> communicate just the UEFI and ACPI entry points, but the FDT is never
>>>>>>>> unflattened and used to configure the system.
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel at linaro.org>
>>>>>>> On further thought, nak. I want tree modifications to be treated as
>>>>>>> bugs. Do a checksum CRC32 or check. It's simpler and it can be extended
>>>>>>> to us an in-blob CRC when the file format gets upreved to include one.
>>>>>> Why? MIPS Octeon is full of them BTW. So the rule is any modifications
>>>>>> or fixups have to be on the unflattened tree?
>>>>> That, or we require the fixups to explicitly clean up the CRC after
>>>>> themselves. That will force them to be visible. Anything using the
>>>>> fdt_*() write functions could potentially take care of it
>>>>> automatically. That would make it immediately discoverable where
>>>>> changes are being made in the tree.
>>>> Doesn't that defeat the purpose of capturing the FDT as it was passed
>>>> by the bootloader? Those fixups will be reapplied by the kexec'ed
>>>> kernel anyway.
>>> We're always going to be in a grey area here. There are some things
>>> that should not be passed over. For example, a framebuffer that is
>>> passed in from firmware will no longer be valid on kexec. Right now on
>>> arch/arm, the exynos platform fixes up the DT because the memory node
>>> is outright /corrupt/. In the MIPS case, they do a bunch of stuff in
>>> the kernel to figure out the hardware as configured by firmware. I
>>> don't agree with that approach, but I would be very surprised if the
>>> full original DT has any validity after the early boot fixups.
>> Well, yes, but those fixups will presumably be done on every boot,
>> including the kexec ones.
>>> Early boot fixups to the .dtb are always going to be oddball cases.
>> OK, so generally speaking, whether the original DTB is more suitable
>> to be presented through /sys/firmware/fdt than the 'current' FDT
>> (i.e., whatever is in memory at the time the sysfs node is accessed)
>> is not obvious at all. So why not just do the latter?
> We're now talking theoreticals. In the case you're working on
> (ACPI+FDT), the FDT is generated by Grub or the EFI stub as an
> intermediary format, and there isn't currently any code in your boot
> path that modifies the FDT. You're arguing for a future situation
> where the kernel makes a fixup that is not wanted in the second
> kernel. I'm arguing that 1) I want to /know/ when that happens because
> there are very few situations where it is a valid thing to do, and 2)
> the likelyhood of that happening in the FDT+ACPI case is somewhere
> between slim and none because you're working with an intermediary FDT,
> not a real hardware description.

But do you still want the warning? Or only if you access the sysfs
node? Or just a pr_warn() perhaps rather than a full blown WARN() ?
MIPS will start seeing the warning as well even if they don't care
about what is in /sys/firmware/fdt


More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list