[SPAM] [PATCH v5 4/7] rockchip: Support building the all output files in binman

[Quentin Schulz]

Hi Simon,

On 12/8/22 18:32, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Xavier,
> 
> On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 at 03:25, Xavier Drudis Ferran <xdrudis at tinet.cat> wrote:
>>
>> El Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 08:56:57AM +1300, Simon Glass deia:
>>> +                             @tee-SEQ {
>>> +                                     fit,operation = "split-elf";
>>> +                                     description = "TEE";
>>> +                                     type = "tee";
>>> +                                     arch = "arm64";
>>> +                                     os = "tee";
>>> +                                     compression = "none";
>>> +                                     fit,load;
>>> +                                     fit,entry;
>>> +                                     fit,data;
>>> +
>>> +                                     tee-os {
>>> +                                     };
>>> +                             };
>>
>> I don't know, I may likely have missed something here, but are you sure you're
>> taking Jerome into account ?
>>
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2022-July/490069.html__;!!OOPJP91ZZw!ltyK0RA-1Vj1dgI1cBlgG1bJOhuZ4JGxwGBIl-Nt-hFz0eZTXmQKALvE9wCKtquDSpexcMtSVjm7ay_Mn7a5e-N4yIc$
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2022-November/499306.html__;!!OOPJP91ZZw!ltyK0RA-1Vj1dgI1cBlgG1bJOhuZ4JGxwGBIl-Nt-hFz0eZTXmQKALvE9wCKtquDSpexcMtSVjm7ay_Mn7a5Y8ANiXk$
> 
> No, I have not done that. The patches mentioned are additions to a
> deprecated script!
> 

I think there's a a possible misunderstanding here. I believe Jerome 
pointed out that make_fit_atf.py currently supports two formats for the 
tee binary and is asking if the implementation you're suggesting take 
care of that.

> It introduces a new binary format which binman needs to decode...that
> will need to be added as a new type, I think, since it seems to use
> the filename suffix to decide what format it is in.
> 

If my aforementioned assumption is correct, that unfortunately would 
make this patch series a regression, making it a blocker.

Or maybe I misunderstood something?

Cheers,
Quentin