Hi all, yup, I completely understand and agree with you.
One way would be to detect the characteristic string Lynx has in the beginning of the FIT image " eLynxSecure" : mkimage: FIT description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64) Created: Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026 Image 0 (kernel-1) Description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64) Created: Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026 Type: Kernel Image Compression: uncompressed Data Size: Architecture: AArch64 OS: Linux Load Address: Entry Point: Image 1 (fdt-1) Description: Flattened Device Tree blob for LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64) Created: Thu Feb 19 11:44:07 2026 Type: Flat Device Tree Compression: uncompressed Data Size: Architecture: AArch64 Default Configuration: 'conf-1' Configuration 0 (conf-1) Description: LynxSecure 2025.10.0-39844b80e0 SRP (aarch64) Kernel: kernel-1 FDT: fdt-1 xxd -l 128 00000000: d00d feed 1dea 3bd5 0000 0030 1dea 3b64 ......;....0..;d 00000010: 0000 0030 0000 0011 0000 0010 0000 0000 ...0............ 00000020: 0000 0071 1dea 3b34 0000 0000 0000 0000 ...q..;4........ 00000030: 0000 0001 0000 0000 0000 0003 0000 002e ................ 00000040: 0000 0065 4c79 6e78 5365 6375 7265 2032 ...eLynxSecure 2 00000050: 3032 352e 3130 2e30 2d33 3938 3434 6238 025.10.0-39844b8 00000060: 3065 3020 5352 5020 2861 6172 6368 3634 0e0 SRP (aarch64 00000070: 2900 0000 0000 0003 0000 0004 0000 0056 )..............V Thing is I am currently pretty busy with other stuff, so wont be able to commit myself to it at the moment. Maybe you can work out a proper solution, based on info I provided. To my understanding, shouldn’t actually be that complex, e.g. just add check for eLynxSecure in the code location where my patch is. But may be I don’t see the whole picture of U-Boot and missing something. Let me know if I can be of help somehow Dj Dorde Stojicevic Networks and Cybersecurity Rohde & Schwarz SIT GmbH Hemminger Strasse 41 | 70499 Stuttgart-Weilimdorf | Germany Phone: +4971169945195 Internet: www.rohde-schwarz.com Geschäftsführer / Managing Director: Ralf Koenzen Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender / Chair of the Supervisory Board: Mario Paoli Sitz / Registered Office: Stuttgart Handelsregister / Commercial Register: AG Stuttgart HRB 759 934 Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer (USt-IdNr.) / VAT Identification No.: DE 121 963 283 Elektro-Altgeräte Register (EAR) / WEEE Register No.: DE 877 727 67 -----Original Message----- From: Tom Rini <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2026 11:24 PM To: Stojicevic Dorde (11SIEPT1) <[email protected]> Cc: Quentin Schulz <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: *EXT* Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature*** On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 07:30:13AM +0000, Dorde Stojicevic wrote: > Hi all, > > sorry that it took a while to get the response from Lynx but it couldn´t be > helped unfortunately. > > I got the response from Lynx: > > " Hello Dorde. > > I’ve got a replay from our engineering team. We do not support u-boot, so we > don’t have any plans to make SRP “ARM64 kernel“ compatible. > > We work with board with default u-boot (for now it is U-Boot SPL 2020.04). > > So, you are free to make any changes in u-boot to make SRP run in newest > version of u-boot. > " > > I am a bit surprised by the response that they don´t seem really interested > in it, but it is how it is. So we are free to apply the patch to our liking. > > Let me know how we proceed from here Well, if they aren't going to do the work, someone needs to do the work to support the OS. What's happened since 2020.04 is that we now correctly detect and fail something that claims to be a Linux ARM64 Image, but is not. We aren't going to go back and re-allow that, it was a bug. The proposal I outlined for how I think it should look, for proper support, is something that I hope someone interested / motivated can look in to doing. -- Tom
