mirror of
https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky
synced 2026-05-01 06:32:11 +02:00
c93f487dc4
For u-boot test cases (bitbake virtual/bootloader) inheriting the
kernel-fitimage.bbclass is no longer needed. Also setting any variable
which is evaluated by the kernel-fitimage.bbclass but not by
uboot-sign.bbclass is pointless since:
* Commit OE-Core rev: 5e12dc911d0c541f43aa6d0c046fb87e8b7c1f7e
changed the test case from
bitbake virtual/kernel
to
bitbake virtual/bootloader
* Commit OE-Core rev: 259bfa86f384206f0d0a96a5b84887186c5f689e has
finally removed the dependency of uboot-sign.bbclass on the
kernel-fitimage.bbclass completely.
Remove the related lines of code which are now without any effect.
The two test cases test_uboot_fit_image and test_uboot_sign_fit_image
do the exact same test. Both generate a binary equal its file:
/dts-v1/;
/ {
description = "A model description";
#address-cells = <1>;
images {
uboot {
description = "U-Boot image";
data = /incbin/("u-boot-nodtb.bin");
type = "standalone";
os = "u-boot";
arch = "arm";
compression = "none";
load = <0x80080000>;
entry = <0x80080000>;
};
fdt {
description = "U-Boot FDT";
data = /incbin/("u-boot.dtb");
type = "flat_dt";
arch = "arm";
compression = "none";
};
};
configurations {
default = "conf";
conf {
description = "Boot with signed U-Boot FIT";
loadables = "uboot";
fdt = "fdt";
};
};
};
The code diff between the two equal test cases looks like:
@@ -1,8 +1,9 @@
- def test_uboot_fit_image(self):
+ def test_uboot_sign_fit_image(self):
"""
Summary: Check if Uboot FIT image and Image Tree Source
(its) are built and the Image Tree Source has the
- correct fields.
+ correct fields, in the scenario where the Kernel
+ is also creating/signing it's fitImage.
Expected: 1. u-boot-fitImage and u-boot-its can be built
2. The type, load address, entrypoint address and
default values of U-boot image are correct in the
@@ -26,16 +27,15 @@
UBOOT_LOADADDRESS = "0x80080000"
UBOOT_ENTRYPOINT = "0x80080000"
UBOOT_FIT_DESC = "A model description"
-
-# Enable creation of Kernel fitImage
KERNEL_IMAGETYPES += " fitImage "
-KERNEL_CLASSES = " kernel-fitimage"
+KERNEL_CLASSES = " kernel-fitimage "
UBOOT_SIGN_ENABLE = "1"
FIT_GENERATE_KEYS = "1"
UBOOT_SIGN_KEYDIR = "${TOPDIR}/signing-keys"
UBOOT_SIGN_IMG_KEYNAME = "img-oe-selftest"
UBOOT_SIGN_KEYNAME = "cfg-oe-selftest"
FIT_SIGN_INDIVIDUAL = "1"
+UBOOT_MKIMAGE_SIGN_ARGS = "-c 'a smart U-Boot comment'"
"""
self.write_config(config)
Conclusion: The test case test_uboot_sign_fit_image looks redundant.
Contrary to its name, it does not insert any signature nodes into the
its-file and therefore does not test any type of signature.
Code history:
- Commit OE-Core rev: e71e4c617568496ae3bd6bb678f97b4f73cb43d8
introduces both test cases.
- Commit OE-Core rev: 5e12dc911d0c541f43aa6d0c046fb87e8b7c1f7e
changes both test cases like this:
- bitbake("virtual/kernel")
+ bitbake("virtual/bootloader")
It looks like the original implementation of test_uboot_sign_fit_image
was supposed to test the interaction between the kernel-fitimage.bbclass
and uboot-sign.bbclass which does not longer work like that.
When compiling u-boot, the variable that is relevant for creating an its
file with signature nodes is: SPL_SIGN_ENABLE. This is what the test
case test_sign_standalone_uboot_fit_image verifies. Lets just delete the
now obsolete test_uboot_sign_fit_image test case.
(From OE-Core rev: de8bfdff0f997f59a2bd27842a2ffcd365f725f3)
Signed-off-by: Adrian Freihofer <adrian.freihofer@siemens.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>