Whitebox
/
u-boot
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity
upstream u-boot with additional patches for our devices/boards: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-March/282789.html (AXP crashes) ; Gbit ethernet patch for some LIME2 revisions ; with SPI flash support
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
52067 Commits
3 Branches
0 Tags
148 MiB
Tag: Branch: Tree: 1a5da02c15
Branches Tags
${ item.name }
Create tag ${ searchTerm }
Create branch ${ searchTerm }
from '1a5da02c15'
${ noResults }
u-boot/tools/binman/test/31_x86-rom-me.dts

21 lines
247 B
Raw Normal View History Unescape

binman: Add support for building x86 ROMs 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>
8 years ago
/dts-v1/;
/ {
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <1>;
binman {
binman: Rename 'position' to 'offset' 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>
6 years ago
sort-by-offset;
binman: Add support for building x86 ROMs 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>
8 years ago
end-at-4gb;
size = <0x800000>;
intel-descriptor {
tools: binman: Add missing filenames for various x86 rom tests With recent changes, some x86-specific rom tests of binman fail to run. Fix it by adding missing filenames in corresponding entries. Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
8 years ago
filename = "descriptor.bin";
binman: Add support for building x86 ROMs 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>
8 years ago
};
intel-me {
tools: binman: Add missing filenames for various x86 rom tests With recent changes, some x86-specific rom tests of binman fail to run. Fix it by adding missing filenames in corresponding entries. Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
8 years ago
filename = "me.bin";
binman: Rename 'position' to 'offset' 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>
6 years ago
offset-unset;
binman: Add support for building x86 ROMs 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>
8 years ago
};
};
};