Hi Ahmad, thanks for your input, please see below.
On 26-01-22, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > Hello Marco, > > On 1/18/26 8:09 PM, Marco Felsch wrote: > > Hi Ahmad, > > > > On 26-01-15, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > > I get your point regarding the unnecessary breakage. It would have been > > nice if we could have a TF-A loading abstraction within the PBL since > > loading the TF-A and (opt. OP-TEE OS) is mostly the same on each and > > every ARMv8-A SoC and we tend to adapt barebox rather than adapting the > > TF-A binary. > > Sure, I would also love to have a generic flow for that and that's one > reason, why I want to restructure our early PBL code and want to avoid > extra API breakage till then. > > > However I would like to mention that handover data was meant to be > > passing data between the PBL and barebox. We would repurpose the > > handover mechanism if we would use the handover data. In this case it > > could be re-used in several other places. Therefore I'm not a fan of > > this idea. > > My original thought is that we could use the same DT later for passing > to barebox proper as well, so we are really just moving the addition of > the handoff entry earlier. > > I see now that this doesn't really work as barebox can be chainloaded at > EL2/1 and in that case, the initial setting of the oftree handoff data > would've been lost. > > > What do you think about adding the 'fdt' support only to the 'lowlevel' > > APIs: > > - __imx8mp_load_and_start_image_via_tfa() > > - __imx8mm_load_and_start_image_via_tfa() > > - __imx8mn_load_and_start_image_via_tfa() > > ? > > Sure, I can live with that. Okay, I dropped the imx8m*_load_and_start_image_via_tfa() changes but kept the changes for __imx8m*_load_and_start_image_via_tfa(). Regards, Marco
