[coreboot] flashrom image identification problem/coreboot signature RFC

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 14.06.2008 21:53, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> Peter Stuge wrote:
>   
>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 09:25:43PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>>> This heuristic is no longer good enough. Any ideas for a nice and
>>>> simple coreboot signature?
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> Yes. A LAR file with that information in the image.
>>>     
>>>       
>> Ah of course - yes for v3 that's perfect.
>>
>> What about v2?
>>
>>   
>>     
> I suggest using the same mechanism, wrapping the information in a lar
> header, making it a single file lar. The lar format can handle this, and
> we don't have to worry for different versions.
>   

How about a generic bootblock/VPD signature instead? Having a short
signature in the top 256 bytes or so will allow recognition of complete
and incomplete (only partly mapped) coreboot images easily.

Proposal for signature formats:

4 bytes:
"CB20" for v2.0 and "CB30" for v3.0

8 bytes (option 1):
"CB203300" for v2.0, rev 3300

8 bytes (option 2):
"coreboot"

16 bytes:
"coreboot20r3300 " for v2.0, r3300 (note the space at the end for
5-digit svn revisions)

Regards,
Carl-Daniel