Hi Neha, On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 at 23:20, Neha Malcom Francis <n-fran...@ti.com> wrote: > > Hi Simon > > On 18/10/23 09:03, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Neha, > > > > On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 at 03:58, Neha Malcom Francis <n-fran...@ti.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Simon > >> > >> On 08/10/23 04:39, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Neha, > >>> > >>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 04:07, Neha Malcom Francis <n-fran...@ti.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> According to the TRMs of K3 platform of devices, the ROM boot image > >>>> format specifies a "Core Options Field" that provides the capability to > >>>> set the boot core in lockstep when set to 0 or to split mode when set > >>>> to 2. Add support for providing the same from the binman DTS. Also > >>>> modify existing test case for ensuring future coverage. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Neha Malcom Francis <n-fran...@ti.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> Link to J721E TRM: https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/spruil1 > >>>> Section 4.5.4.1 Boot Info > >>>> > >>>> Changes in v3: > >>>> - updated function comments > >>>> - removed inconsistency in setting bootcore_opts to 32 > >>>> > >>>> Changes in v2: > >>>> - included TRM link in commit message > >>>> > >>>> tools/binman/btool/openssl.py | 6 ++++-- > >>>> tools/binman/entries.rst | 1 + > >>>> tools/binman/etype/ti_secure_rom.py | 11 +++++++++-- > >>>> tools/binman/etype/x509_cert.py | 3 ++- > >>>> tools/binman/test/297_ti_secure_rom.dts | 1 + > >>>> 5 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >>>> > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>>> diff --git a/tools/binman/test/297_ti_secure_rom.dts > >>>> b/tools/binman/test/297_ti_secure_rom.dts > >>>> index d1313769f4..1a3eca9425 100644 > >>>> --- a/tools/binman/test/297_ti_secure_rom.dts > >>>> +++ b/tools/binman/test/297_ti_secure_rom.dts > >>>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ > >>>> binman { > >>>> ti-secure-rom { > >>>> content = <&unsecure_binary>; > >>>> + core-opts = <2>; > >>> > >>> here ^ > >>> > >>> Do you think there could be a binding file in dt-bindings/ for this value? > >>> > >> > >> Sorry for getting back to this patch so late, but wanted to ask about > >> this. I > >> had seen a last version of getting the binman compatible in dt-bindings > >> but I > >> don't see it merged. Not sure where I would add this property in. > > > > Yes it is difficult to do anything genuinely new. > > > > I am anticipating something like compatible = "ti,secure-rom" > > > > so I suppose you could create a header file with suitable values for > > this property. > > > > On the other hand, you could wait until there is progress with the bindings. > > > > > > I can try adding a header file for now, but follow up question; shouldn't it > be > added to arch/arm/dts rather than include/dt-bindings? There was traction by > DT > maintainers to move all such constants not directly used by the driver (in > this > case binman) to arch/arm/dts? [1] If you mean to use these constants in > binman, > will need to see how we can do that.
You can put the constant in the .dtsi and #include your binding file. But if you hit problems, let's worry about it later. > > >> > >>>> }; > >>>> unsecure_binary: blob-ext { > >>>> filename = "ti_unsecure.bin"; > >>>> -- > >>>> 2.34.1 > >>>> > > Regards, > > Simon > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/all/c4d53e9c-dac0-8ccc-dc86-faada324b...@linaro.org/ Regards, Simon