On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 5:31 AM Michal Simek <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/5/26 15:57, Erich E. Hoover wrote:
> > ...
> > options, like so:
> > ===
> > image : {
> >       [init] fsbl.int
>
> please use different name then fsbl because fsbl is not doing this 
> programming.
> That's done by bootrom itself.
>
> Topic board is defining it like this.
> board/topic/zynq/zynq-topic-miamiplus/ps7_regs.txt
> but that's for zynq

My apologies, maybe "reginit.int" like the example for the Versal in
UG1283?  I'll remove this line as well, since that's more specific to
what we're doing:
[destination_cpu=none] fsbl.tcl

> Actually I think would be good to recap format because origin format
> is different compare to what it is used by bootgen right now.
>
> https://docs.amd.com/r/en-US/ug1283-bootgen-user-guide/Initialization-Pairs-and-INT-File-Attribute
> ...

Are you suggesting adding an additional comment to the commit akin to
"This currently uses the same register initialization file format as
zynqmpimage (ASCII text hex values with each line composed of a pair
of register address and value) and is not yet compatible with the
format used by bootgen."?

> >   static const struct bif_flags bif_flags[] = {
> > +     { "init", BIF_FLAG_INIT },
> >       { "fsbl_config", BIF_FLAG_FSBL_CONFIG },
> >       { "trustzone", BIF_FLAG_TZ },
> >       { "pmufw_image", BIF_FLAG_PMUFW_IMAGE },
> > @@ -279,7 +280,7 @@ static int bif_add_blob(const void *data, size_t len, 
> > size_t *offset)
> >       return 0;
> >   }
> >
> > -static int bif_init(void)
> > +static int bif_initialize(void)
>
> What's the reason for this rename? I don't think you should rename it because 
> it
> is just distracting.

I was trying to match nearby behavior with other flags
("bif_fsbl_config" as an example).  How about I change the new
function to "bif_add_reginit" (similar to bif_add_pmufw instead)?

> Anyway I have tested this patch and output looks reasonable. I would obviously
> prefer to add more features there (like ignoring comments) or unify the format
> but that's out of the purpose of this patch.

I would be happy to add some more features to this, would you like
patches for this added as part of a series or submitted separately?

Best,
Erich

Reply via email to