[PATCH RFC 6/6] binman: doc: update Optional entries

[Simon Glass]

Hi Yannic,

On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 at 00:21, Yannic Moog <Y.Moog at phytec.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2025-02-10 at 06:08 -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 at 03:30, Yannic Moog <y.moog at phytec.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > The binman documentation of Optional entries is not accurate in the
> > > sense that it does not cover blobs entry type. As this is also the most
> > > widely used type to have the optional entry, document the interaction
> > > with faking blobs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yannic Moog <y.moog at phytec.de>
> > > ---
> > >  tools/binman/binman.rst | 9 ++++++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/binman/binman.rst b/tools/binman/binman.rst
> > > index 990fc295770..2bafa6ca408 100644
> > > --- a/tools/binman/binman.rst
> > > +++ b/tools/binman/binman.rst
> > > @@ -1145,7 +1145,14 @@ called on all entries.
> > >  It is not possible for an entry to mark itself absent at any other point in the
> > >  processing. It must happen in the ObtainContents() method.
> > >
> > > -The effect is as if the entry had never been present at all, since the image
> > > +The effect depends on the type of entry.
> > > +
> > > +Blobs
> > > +~~~~~
> > > +For blobs, the effect depends on whether --fake-ext-blobs is passed
> > > +to binman. (This is the case by default)
> > > +In case --fake-ext-blobs is set, any missing entries will be faked.
> > > +If not set, it is as if the entry had never been present at all, since the image
> > >  is packed without it and it disappears from the list of entries.
> >
> > I'm not quite following this. The text seems OK but your heading
> > implies that things other than blobs can be faked. All of this
> > functionality is only for blobs.
>
> The heading is a subsection of "Optional entries". To my knowledge the "optional" property is not
> limited to blobs. But blobs get special treatment in regards to "optional" due to the --fake-ext-
> blobs option. Hence the subsection.
>
> What would you like me to change to make this clearer?

Oh I see. Are you saying that optional entries end up in the image
when they are faked, external blobs? If so, that seems like a bug to
me.

Regards,
Simon