Hi Marek, On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 at 14:51, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > > On 7/9/24 11:24 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > Hi, > > > On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 at 01:55, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > >> > >> On 6/27/24 10:19 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >>>>>>>> Add new binman etype which allows signing both the SPL and fitImage > >>>>>>>> sections > >>>>>>>> of i.MX8M flash.bin using CST. There are multiple DT properties > >>>>>>>> which govern > >>>>>>>> the signing process, nxp,loader-address is the only mandatory one > >>>>>>>> which sets > >>>>>>>> the SPL signature start address without the imx8mimage header, this > >>>>>>>> should be > >>>>>>>> SPL text base. The key material can be configured using optional DT > >>>>>>>> properties > >>>>>>>> nxp,srk-table, nxp,csf-crt, nxp,img-crt, all of which default the > >>>>>>>> key material > >>>>>>>> names generated by CST tool scripts. The nxp,unlock property can be > >>>>>>>> used to > >>>>>>>> unlock CAAM access in SPL section. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Tim Harvey <thar...@gateworks.com> > >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Applied the series, thanks. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This lacks tests - can you please add sufficient tests in ftest.py to > >>>>>> get the cover coverage back to 100%? Please try 'binman test -T' to > >>>>>> see this. > >>>>> > >>>>> Any thoughts on this, please? At present -master is broken for one > >>>>> file and -next has three problems. > >>>> > >>>> It is in the pipeline. > >>>> > >>>> What exactly is the error you observe ? > >>>> > >>>> When I run binman test -T , I get a lot of output, but no error reports? > >>> > >>> Sorry I somehow missed this email. > >>> > >>> The tests are in ftest.py - there are lots of examples, e.g. > >>> testXilinxBootgenSigning() - commit d8a2d3b29 > >> > >> This seems to be testing some out-of-tree tool , not binman ? > > > > It is testing the etype, which needs the tool to be present, yes, You > > can use 'binman tool -f' to fetch tools if you want to try that one. > > I'm not getting anywhere with this, can you please draft some example > patch how the fix should look like? Otherwise, this is not going to move > anywhere I'm afraid.
Please see [1] Regards, Simon [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20240826191143.426387-16-...@chromium.org/
