Ilias Apalodimas <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Jonathan > > Thanks for working on this > > On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 11:41:19AM -0500, Jonathan Humphreys wrote: >> Define the firmware components updatable via EFI capsule update, including >> defining capsule GUIDs for the various firmware components for the AM62px >> SK. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Humphreys <[email protected]> >> --- >> board/ti/am62px/evm.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> include/configs/am62px_evm.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/board/ti/am62px/evm.c b/board/ti/am62px/evm.c >> index 97a95ce8cc2..6d0f66e5dc0 100644 >> --- a/board/ti/am62px/evm.c >> +++ b/board/ti/am62px/evm.c >> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ >> * >> */ >> >> +#include <efi_loader.h> >> #include <asm/arch/hardware.h> >> #include <asm/io.h> >> #include <dm/uclass.h> >> @@ -13,6 +14,37 @@ >> #include <fdt_support.h> >> #include <spl.h> >> >> +struct efi_fw_image fw_images[] = { > > It's better if we add an > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT) > for both of the structs that follow (and it applies to all your patches) >
Ilias, thanks for the reviews. I had this protected in #if's in an earlier patch set, as you suggest here. However, in those reviews, Roger recommended that we don't do that and put conditions around the use of it in set_dfu_alt_info(). https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ I assume the reasoning is to reduce #if's in the code and rely on the compiler to be smart enough to remove dead data. (Roger, speak up if I misrepresent you.) I'm ok to do either way. What is the preferred way in U-Boot? Thanks Jon >> + { >> + .image_type_id = AM62PX_SK_TIBOOT3_IMAGE_GUID, >> + .fw_name = u"AM62PX_SK_TIBOOT3", >> + .image_index = 1, >> + }, >> + { >> + .image_type_id = AM62PX_SK_SPL_IMAGE_GUID, >> + .fw_name = u"AM62PX_SK_SPL", >> + .image_index = 2, >> + }, >> + { >> + .image_type_id = AM62PX_SK_UBOOT_IMAGE_GUID, >> + .fw_name = u"AM62PX_SK_UBOOT", >> + .image_index = 3, >> + } >> +}; >> + >> +struct efi_capsule_update_info update_info = { >> + .dfu_string = "sf 0:0=tiboot3.bin raw 0 80000;" >> + "tispl.bin raw 80000 200000;u-boot.img raw 280000 400000", >> + .num_images = ARRAY_SIZE(fw_images), >> + .images = fw_images, >> +}; > > I haven't worked on any TI platforms lately so I cant say much about the > naming and the flash regions. The definition seems correct > > >> + >> +void set_dfu_alt_info(char *interface, char *devstr) >> +{ >> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT)) >> + env_set("dfu_alt_info", update_info.dfu_string); >> +} > > There's a CONFIG_SET_DFU_ALT_INFO symbol. This better if we add a check here > as well > >> + >> int board_init(void) >> { >> return 0; >> diff --git a/include/configs/am62px_evm.h b/include/configs/am62px_evm.h >> index 06b12860e21..57a1ba9dc3c 100644 >> --- a/include/configs/am62px_evm.h >> +++ b/include/configs/am62px_evm.h >> @@ -8,6 +8,30 @@ >> #ifndef __CONFIG_AM62PX_EVM_H >> #define __CONFIG_AM62PX_EVM_H >> > [...] > > Regards > /Ilias
