Hi Alper, On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 11:58, Alper Nebi Yasak <alpernebiya...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 21/02/2022 07:40, Simon Glass wrote: > > On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 at 08:53, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 at 10:34, Alper Nebi Yasak <alpernebiya...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> I can reproduce this and tried a few things, but more issues just kept > >>> popping up (outside u-boot as well). I got it to a point where the > >>> command re-packs the FIT and the image but quite wrongly. The offset and > >>> image-pos properties get added in the FIT, and the image main-section > >>> just concatenates all entries without regard to set offsets. I'll > >>> need more time to work those out, then to add tests and send patches. > >> > >> I am going to try to merge my fit generator series today. > >> > >> One issue I notice is that the conversion to use entry_Section changes > >> the contents of the self._fit_entries dict. Before it was keyed by > >> relative path, but entry_section keys self._entries by node name. > > Yeah, this causes an error in image.FindEntryPath() while trying to > replace e.g. "/fit@0x280000/images/u-boot" since there is no "images" > entry in the FIT. Changing the key to the node name works, but then the > "binman replace" invocation needs to use e.g. "/fit@0x280000/u-boot". > > >> > >> We may need to split it up. I will see if I can at least merge my > >> series, which should not make things any worse, then see if I can come > >> up with ideas. > >> > >> Thanks for the diff. > > > > I did a bit more fiddling and pushed a tree to u-boot-dm/fit-working > > > > It refactors the fit implementation to separate scanning from emitting > > the tree and I think this might help quite a bit. I'll send out the > > series when I get a chance in the next few days or so. > > I've also managed to somewhat fix the rest of the issues I wrote, so now > I can replace a FIT entry with a modified one (having a different u-boot > file), or replace a subentry of the FIT with an arbitrary file. > > I couldn't look at your new version much but I'll try to see how good my > fixes apply on top of it, will probably take me longer to patchify things.
OK I'm going to send a new series with (most of) your suggested fixes a new patches, then my refactoring. Just need to get things through CI. Regards, Simon
