Hi Christian,
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:57 PM Bin Meng bmeng.cn@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Christian,
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:18 PM Christian Gmeiner christian.gmeiner@gmail.com wrote:
Am Mi., 12. Dez. 2018 um 15:27 Uhr schrieb Christian Gmeiner christian.gmeiner@gmail.com:
Hi Bin,
Finally I have some time to look deeper into this issue.
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:47 PM Christian Gmeiner christian.gmeiner@gmail.com wrote:
Coreboot does not contain such a check: https://github.com/coreboot/coreboot/blob/eeb4e20b2f6d786c92fe3efb30817e9038...
Before this change cbfsinit failed with 'Bad CBFS file'. After this change all cbfs commands are working as expected.
Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner christian.gmeiner@gmail.com
fs/cbfs/cbfs.c | 6 +----- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/cbfs/cbfs.c b/fs/cbfs/cbfs.c index 0dce639b49..2a581f0c18 100644 --- a/fs/cbfs/cbfs.c +++ b/fs/cbfs/cbfs.c @@ -96,11 +96,7 @@ static int file_cbfs_next_file(u8 *start, u32 size, u32 align, }
swap_file_header(&header, fileHeader);
if (header.offset < sizeof(struct cbfs_fileheader) ||header.offset > header.len) {file_cbfs_result = CBFS_BAD_FILE;return -1;}It looks to me the existing codes were doing some sanity checks. Can you elaborate why this is failing on your board? In your coreboot reference, I don't see exactly how U-Boot codes are connected to the coreboot one.
This has nothing to do with my board at all - I can easily reproduce this issue under qemu:
[snip]
What is needed to get further with this patch?
ping
Sorry, I meant to take some time to have a look at this. Will do this week.
I have looked at this patch. It looks we just need remove the "header.offset > header.len" check. The other check is still valid.
During the investigation, I've noticed some other issues in the cbfs codes. I've included your patch in my series [1]. Please have a look.
[1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=83355
Regards, Bin