On 01/27/17 16:43, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 03:46:33PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 01/27/17 15:18, Kevin O'Connor wrote: >>> If an offset is going to be added, shouldn't both a source offset and >>> destination offset be used? >>> >>> /* >>> * COMMAND_WRITE_POINTER - update a writeable file named >>> * @pointer.dest_file at @pointer.dest_offset, by writing pointer >>> * plus @pointer.src_offset to the blob originating from >>> * @src_file. 1,2,4 or 8 byte unsigned write is used depending >>> * on @pointer.size. >>> */ >>> struct { >>> char dest_file[BIOS_LINKER_LOADER_FILESZ]; >>> char src_file[BIOS_LINKER_LOADER_FILESZ]; >>> uint32_t src_offset, dest_offset; >>> uint8_t size; >>> } pointer; >>> >>> I doubt the offsets or size is really all that important though. >> >> The offset into the fw_cfg file that receives the allocation address is >> important, that allows the same file to receive several different >> addresses (for different downloaded blobs), at different offsets. >> >> OTOH, asking the firmware to add a constant to the address value before >> writing it to the fw_cfg file is not necessary, in my opinion. The blob >> that the firmware allocated and downloaded originates from QEMU to begin >> with, so QEMU knows its internal structure. > > I guess I'm missing why QEMU would want to use the same writable file > for multiple pointers
I know no specific reason; I just thought this possible generalization was one of the advantages in Michael's suggestion. > as well as why it would want support for > pointers smaller than 8 bytes in size. Hm, right, good point. > If it's because it may be > easier to support an internal QEMU blob of a particular format, then > adding a src_offset would facilitate that. > > However, if it was done so that WRITE_POINTER mimicks ADD_POINTER then > that's fine too. That might be the main reason I guess; reading back a bit, Michael wrote "... a variant of ADD_POINTER". > I'm okay with either format. I'd say let's go ahead with Michael's proposal then. Ben, are you okay with that? Thanks! Laszlo