[PATCH v2 00/21] Universal Payload initial series

[Heinrich Schuchardt]

On 16.07.24 21:08, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 13, 2024 at 09:40:17PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 13. Juli 2024 10:12:50 MESZ schrieb Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis at xs4all.nl>:
>>>> From: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
>>>> Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 08:00:34 +0100
>>>>
>>>> Universal Payload (UPL) is an Industry Standard for firmware
>>>> components[1].
>>>
>>> I think you have some trouble understanding the concept of industry
>>> standard ;).  I guess you want this to become an industry standard.
>>> Firmly https://xkcd.com/927/ territory if you ask me.
>>>
>>>> UPL is designed to improve interoperability within the
>>>> firmware industry, allowing mixing and matching of projects with less
>>>> friction and fewer project-specific implementations. UPL is
>>>> cross-platform, supporting ARM, x86 and RISC-V initially.
>>>>
>>>> This series provides some initial support for this, targeting 0.9.1 and
>>>> sandbox only.
>>>>
>>>> Features still to come include:
>>>> - Support for architectures
>>>> - FIT validation
>>>> - Handoff validation
>>>> - Interoperability tests
>>>>
>>>> This series is available at dm/uplb-working and requires the alist
>>>> series at dm/alist-working[2]
>>
>> Why is this series needed?
>
> Because UPL is a standard, supported by other projects, which requires
> more than Just Nothing Else on top of what we do today. Please do
> provide constructive feedback on the changes themselves, but bringing in
> UPL support proper is something we should (and will) do. Thanks!
>

SPL loading a FIT image (e.g. EDK II + OpenSBI) seems to be very close
to UPL. What is missing?

UPL is meant as the interface between two firmware pieces and not
between firmware and the OS. Why should we let main U-Boot support UPL?
Isn't SPL support sufficient?

Which other projects implement the UPL standard?

Best regards

Heinrich