At present the control module has state information in it, since it is the
primary user of this. But it is a bit odd to have entries and other
modules importing control to obtain this information.
It seems better to have a dedicated state module, which control can use as
well. Create a new module using code from control and update other modules
to use it.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
This function name is too generic for its purpose and is therefore
confusing. It actually only applies to blobs, so rename it to indicate
this.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Binman supports quite a number of different entries now. The operation of
these is not always obvious but at present the source code is the only
reference for understanding how an entry works.
Add a way to create documentation (from the source code) which can be put
in a new 'README.entries' file.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
At present only the more complex entries are documented. It is useful to
have documentation for all entries in one place.
As a first step, add and expand the documentation to cover all entries.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
After some thought, I believe there is an unfortunate naming flaw in
binman. Entries have a position and size, but now that we support
hierarchical sections it is unclear whether a position should be an
absolute position within the image, or a relative position within its
parent section.
At present 'position' actually means the relative position. This indicates
a need for an 'image position' for code that wants to find the location of
an entry without having to do calculations back through parents to
discover this image position.
A better name for the current 'position' or 'pos' is 'offset'. It is not
always an absolute position, but it is always an offset from its parent
offset.
It is unfortunate to rename this concept now, 18 months after binman was
introduced. However I believe it is the right thing to do. The impact is
mostly limited to binman itself and a few changes to in-tree users to
binman:
tegra
sunxi
x86
The change makes old binman definitions (e.g. downstream or out-of-tree)
incompatible if they use the 'pos = <...>' property. Later work will
adjust binman to generate an error when it is used.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Some entry types modify the device tree, e.g. to remove microcode or add a
property. So far this just modifies their local copy and does not affect
a 'shared' device tree.
Rather than doing this modification in the ObtainContents() method, and a
new ProcessFdt() method which is specifically designed to modify this
shared device tree.
Move the existing device-tree code over to use this method, reducing
ObtainContents() to the goal of just obtaining the contents without any
processing, even for device tree.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
When U-Boot started using SPDX tags we were among the early adopters and
there weren't a lot of other examples to borrow from. So we picked the
area of the file that usually had a full license text and replaced it
with an appropriate SPDX-License-Identifier: entry. Since then, the
Linux Kernel has adopted SPDX tags and they place it as the very first
line in a file (except where shebangs are used, then it's second line)
and with slightly different comment styles than us.
In part due to community overlap, in part due to better tag visibility
and in part for other minor reasons, switch over to that style.
This commit changes all instances where we have a single declared
license in the tag as both the before and after are identical in tag
contents. There's also a few places where I found we did not have a tag
and have introduced one.
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
This file was used to select between the normal and fallback libfdt
implementations. Now that we only have one, it is not needed.
Drop it and fix up all users.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Previously we were sometimes forced to collate x86 microcode due to not
having access to the offset of each individual piece. Now that we never
use fdt_fallback, we don't have this problem. Drop this special case from
the code.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
When building for 64-bit x86 we need an SPL binary in the ROM. Add support
for this. Also increase entry test code coverage to 100%.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
The structure of x86 ROMs is pretty complex. There are various binary blobs
to place in the image. Microcode requires special handling so that it is
available to very early code and can be used without any memory whatsoever.
Add support for the various entry types that are currently needed, along
with some tests.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Simon Glass
Tom Rini