image-fit: Be a little more verbose when checking signatures

It is useful to be a little more specific about what is being
checked. Update a few messages to help with this.

Change-Id: I1318a9da01646b5fedf1d22e3119efdbd3e7a99e
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com>
This commit is contained in:
Simon Glass 2020-03-18 11:43:56 -06:00 committed by Gerrit - the friendly Code Review server
parent cbe64dd980
commit c0fa58cda2

View file

@ -1616,7 +1616,8 @@ int fit_image_load(bootm_headers_t *images, ulong addr,
/* Remember (and possibly verify) this config */
images->fit_uname_cfg = fit_uname_config;
if (IMAGE_ENABLE_VERIFY && images->verify) {
puts(" Verifying Hash Integrity ... ");
printf("Verifying Hash Integrity for node '%s'... ",
fdt_get_name(fit, cfg_noffset, NULL));
if (fit_config_verify(fit, cfg_noffset)) {
puts("Bad Data Hash\n");
bootstage_error(bootstage_id +
@ -1633,7 +1634,7 @@ int fit_image_load(bootm_headers_t *images, ulong addr,
fit_uname = fit_get_name(fit, noffset, NULL);
}
if (noffset < 0) {
puts("Could not find subimage node\n");
printf("Could not find subimage node type '%s'\n", prop_name);
bootstage_error(bootstage_id + BOOTSTAGE_SUB_SUBNODE);
return -ENOENT;
}