Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:43:17 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND] initramfs: cleanup incomplete rootfs |
| |
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 2:40 PM David Engraf <david.engraf@sysgo.com> wrote: > On 11.02.19 at 12:40, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:49 AM David Engraf <david.engraf@sysgo.com> wrote: > >> On 11.02.19 at 08:56, David Engraf wrote: > >>> On 09.02.19 at 11:35, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 12:08 AM Andrew Morton > >>>> <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 21:45:21 +0200 Andy Shevchenko > >>>>> <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:22 PM David Engraf > >>>>>> <david.engraf@sysgo.com> wrote:
> >>>> In my case I have got "Junk in compressed archive". I don't know (I > >>>> would check if needed) which exact condition I got since there are > >>>> three places with this message. The file itself smaller than the size > >>>> passed through bootparam. So, when decomression is finished > >>>> (successfully!) we still have a garbarge in the memory which is not > >>>> related to archive. Message per se is okay to have, though I consider > >>>> this non-fatal. > >>> > >>> I can reproduce this special case. The unpacking decompresses the whole > >>> size instead of checking the archive size. I will have a look how to get > >>> the real archive size. > >> > >> I did some checks and manually increased the initramfs size but I always > >> get the following kernel panic: > > > > We need to be on the same page here. > > There are two sizes of initramfs compressed archive: > > 1) actual file size; > > 2) what is declared by boot loader and provided via boot parameters. > > > > In my case I have the 2) bigger than the actual file size. > > Kernel decompresses the initramfs, prints an error that there is junk, > > which is understandable and continues to run init, etc. > > Ok got it. When the memory behind the actual file size is clear (0x0) > the decompression doesn't complain and just ignores the padding. Any > other data will be interpreted as a new archive and thus you'll see the > error message.
Correct.
> Is it possible for you to fill the padding after the actual file size > with 0x00 ?
Not sure. This is boot loader realm. Even if I patch U-Boot, not every boot loader will guarantee this. So, it's fragile to rely on data being 0x00 after actual archive.
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |