hi Simon,
On Sat, 5 Aug 2023 at 22:50, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sughosh,
>
> On Sat, 5 Aug 2023 at 09:03, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Sughosh,
> >
> > On Sat, 5 Aug 2023 at 05:35, Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add support in binman for generating EFI capsules. The capsule
> > > parameters can be specified through the capsule binman entry. Also add
> > > test cases in binman for testing capsule generation.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > > Changes since V6:
> > > * Add macros for the GUID strings in sandbox_efi_capsule.h
> > > * Highlight that the private and public keys are mandatory for capsule
> > > signing.
> > > * Add a URL link to the UEFI spec, as used in the rst files.
> > > * Use local vars for private and public keys in BuildSectionData()
> > > * Use local vars for input payload and capsule filenames in
> > > BuildSectionData().
> > > * Drop the ProcessContents() and SetImagePos() as the superclass
> > > functions suffice.
> > > * Use GUID macro names in the capsule test dts files.
> > > * Rename efi_capsule_payload.bin to capsule_input.bin.
> > >
> > >
> > > include/sandbox_efi_capsule.h | 14 ++
> >
> > Please move this file to a later patch - see below.
> >
> > Could we have a single header file with all the GUIDs, i.e. sandbox, ARM,
> > etc.
> >
> > > tools/binman/entries.rst | 62 ++++++++
> > > tools/binman/etype/efi_capsule.py | 143 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > tools/binman/ftest.py | 121 +++++++++++++++
> > > tools/binman/test/307_capsule.dts | 23 +++
> > > tools/binman/test/308_capsule_signed.dts | 25 +++
> > > tools/binman/test/309_capsule_version.dts | 24 +++
> > > tools/binman/test/310_capsule_signed_ver.dts | 26 ++++
> > > tools/binman/test/311_capsule_oemflags.dts | 24 +++
> > > tools/binman/test/312_capsule_missing_key.dts | 24 +++
> > > .../binman/test/313_capsule_missing_index.dts | 22 +++
> > > .../binman/test/314_capsule_missing_guid.dts | 19 +++
> > > .../test/315_capsule_missing_payload.dts | 19 +++
> > > 13 files changed, 546 insertions(+)
> > > create mode 100644 include/sandbox_efi_capsule.h
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/etype/efi_capsule.py
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/307_capsule.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/308_capsule_signed.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/309_capsule_version.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/310_capsule_signed_ver.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/311_capsule_oemflags.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/312_capsule_missing_key.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/313_capsule_missing_index.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/314_capsule_missing_guid.dts
> > > create mode 100644 tools/binman/test/315_capsule_missing_payload.dts
> > >
>
> [..]
>
> > > diff --git a/tools/binman/test/307_capsule.dts
> > > b/tools/binman/test/307_capsule.dts
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000000..86552ff83f
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/tools/binman/test/307_capsule.dts
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> > > +
> > > +/dts-v1/;
> > > +
> > > +#include <sandbox_efi_capsule.h>
> >
> > We can't include sandbox files in binman! I Does it actually matter
> > what the GUID value is? Can they all be the same? For now I think it
> > is best to have
> >
> > #define BINMAN_TEST_GUID "xxx"
> >
> > repeated at the top of each .dts file. Hopefully at some point we can
> > figure out a sensible way to provide a decoder ring for this mess, so
> > we can use actually names in the binman definition instead of GUIDs.
>
> Oh, having thought about this a bit more, there is a much better way.
>
> In the entry type, allow the image_guid to be a string, like
> 'binman-test' or 'sandbox-test'. Then binman can have a conversion
> function to figure out the GUID to pass to the tool, e.g. in
> efi_capsule.py:
>
> TYPE_TO_GUID = {
> 'binman-test': '09123987987f98712',
> 'sandbox-test':, '98123987123123987123987',
> }
>
> def get_guid(type_str):
> 'Get the GUID to use for a particular purpose"""
> return TYPE_TO_GUID.get(type_str, type_str)
>
> Then you can use these same strings in the sandbox tests, without
> needing to include anything.
Okay, will try this out. Thanks for the suggestion.
-sughosh
>
> >
> > > +
> > > +/ {
> > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > + #size-cells = <1>;
> > > +
> > > + binman {
> > > + efi-capsule {
> > > + image-index = <0x1>;
> > > + /* Image GUID for testing capsule update */
> > > + image-type-id = SANDBOX_UBOOT_IMAGE_GUID;
> > > + hardware-instance = <0x0>;
> > > +
> > > + blob {
> > > + filename = "capsule_input.bin";
> > > + };
> > > + };
> > > + };
> > > +};
>
> Regards,
> Simon
