From: Matthias Schiffer <[email protected]> The examples in the U-boot docs use "hash-N" as the name for hash nodes. It seems "hash@N" was used instead at some point during the development of the FIT format and "hash-N" is more correct; support for "hash@N" is preserved for backward compatibility.
Signed-off-by: Matthias Schiffer <[email protected]> --- common/image-fit.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/common/image-fit.c b/common/image-fit.c index dfd1fa02c..356c1ae5d 100644 --- a/common/image-fit.c +++ b/common/image-fit.c @@ -392,7 +392,9 @@ static int fit_verify_hash(struct fit_handle *handle, struct device_node *image, ret = -EINVAL; } - hash = of_get_child_by_name(image, "hash@1"); + hash = of_get_child_by_name(image, "hash-1"); + if (!hash) + hash = of_get_child_by_name(image, "hash@1"); if (!hash) { if (ret) pr_err("image %s does not have hashes\n", -- 2.17.1 _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
