Hi Takahiro, On Sat, 31 Jul 2021 at 22:29, AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.aka...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Simon, > > On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 10:59:32AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Takahiro, > > > > On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 03:12, AKASHI Takahiro > > <takahiro.aka...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > This new configuration, which was derived from sandbox_defconfig, will be > > > used solely to run efi capsule authentication test as the test requires > > > a public key (esl file) to be embedded in U-Boot binary. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.aka...@linaro.org> > > > --- > > > configs/sandbox_capsule_auth_defconfig | 307 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 307 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 configs/sandbox_capsule_auth_defconfig > > > > NAK. > > > > Please just add it to sandbox_defconfig. We sometimes have to create > > Unfortunately, I can't. > Look, we now have two tests, test_capsule_firmware.py and > test_capsule_firmware_signed.py, and we need U-Boot binaries, > respectively, without a key and with a key. > A single configuration cannot satisfy both. > > > new variants when dealing with actual build variations (e.g. SPL, > > building without OF_LIVE), but here we should just enable the feature > > in sandbox_defconfig. > > > > We already covered embedding key in the binary on another thread. > > Please don't do that. After that debacle I sent a patch explaining > > this: > > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20210725164400.468319-3-...@chromium.org/ > > Please discuss and make an agreement with Heinrich. > The patch for embedding a key has already been merged in -rc1.
Which patch was that? I thought I pushed back on the one that did that. > In my personal opinion, neither approaches won't apply to production > any way. Regards, Simon
