On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 08:47:10AM -0600, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2025 at 11:06:11PM +0530, Beleswar Padhi wrote: > > > In cases where the 'load' property is not defined in a FIT image node, > > fallback to using the data address returned by `fit_image_get_data()`. > > This enables FIT images to omit the 'load' property during FIT creation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <[email protected]> > > --- > > Cc: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > > > v3: Changelog: > > 1. None > > > > Link to v2: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > > > > v2: Changelog: > > 1. New patch. Add support to load images without 'load' property. > > > > common/spl/spl_fit.c | 16 +++++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/common/spl/spl_fit.c b/common/spl/spl_fit.c > > index a588d13eb40..c18c98b2959 100644 > > --- a/common/spl/spl_fit.c > > +++ b/common/spl/spl_fit.c > > @@ -803,6 +803,8 @@ int spl_load_simple_fit(struct spl_image_info > > *spl_image, > > { > > struct spl_image_info image_info; > > struct spl_fit_info ctx; > > + const void *fit_image_loadaddr; > > + size_t fit_image_size; > > int node = -1; > > int ret; > > int index = 0; > > @@ -893,7 +895,19 @@ int spl_load_simple_fit(struct spl_image_info > > *spl_image, > > if (firmware_node == node) > > continue; > > > > - image_info.load_addr = 0; > > + /* > > + * If the 'load' property is not present in the image node, > > + * use the FIT image's data address as the fallback load > > + * address. This allows flexibility in omitting the load address > > + * during FIT creation time. > > + */ > > + ret = fit_image_get_data(ctx.fit, node, > > + &fit_image_loadaddr, &fit_image_size); > > + if (ret < 0) > > + panic("Error accessing node = %d in FIT (%d)\n", node, > > + ret); > > + > > + image_info.load_addr = (ulong)fit_image_loadaddr; > > ret = load_simple_fit(info, offset, &ctx, node, &image_info); > > if (ret < 0 && ret != -EBADSLT) { > > printf("%s: can't load image loadables index %d (ret = > > %d)\n", > > What's the IH_TYPE here? Saying to use something in-place is not always > safe.
Looking at the rest of the series, and then going back to v1 and: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ we're IH_TYPE_STANDALONE which *does* require a load address (see boot/image-fit.c). You might need to look in to a new type or see if another type is reasonable, that doesn't already expect a load address set. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
