Re: [PATCH 5/6] rockchip: mkimage: Add support for up to 4 input files

[Quentin Schulz]

Hi Jonas,

On 1/29/25 11:36 PM, Jonas Karlman wrote:
The v2 image format can support up to 4 embedded images that can be
loaded by the BootROM using the back-to-bootrom method.
Currently two input files can be passed in using the datafile parameter,
separated by a colon (":").

Extend the datafile parameter parsing to support up to 4 input files
separated by a colon (":") for use with the v2 image format.

Signed-off-by: Jonas Karlman <jo...@kwiboo.se>
---
  tools/rkcommon.c | 93 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/rkcommon.c b/tools/rkcommon.c
index 542aca931693..4ff48e81a636 100644
--- a/tools/rkcommon.c
+++ b/tools/rkcommon.c
@@ -148,17 +148,15 @@ static struct spl_info spl_infos[] = {
  /**
   * struct spl_params - spl params parsed in check_params()
   *
- * @init_file:         Init data file path
- * @init_size:         Aligned size of init data in bytes
- * @boot_file:         Boot data file path
- * @boot_size:         Aligned size of boot data in bytes
+ * @file:      image file path
+ * @size:      aligned size of image in bytes

Not really matching reality though. Could make it easier maybe to have 
an intermediary

struct spl_params_image {
    char *file;
    uint32_t size;
};

and then have

struct spl_params {
    struct spl_params_image images[4];
};

?

   */
  
  struct spl_params {
-       char *init_file;
-       uint32_t init_size;
-       char *boot_file;
-       uint32_t boot_size;
+       struct {
+               char *file;
+               uint32_t size;
+       } images[4];
  };
  
  static struct spl_params spl_params = { 0 };
@@ -238,31 +236,32 @@ int rkcommon_check_params(struct image_tool_params 
*params)
        if (!rkcommon_get_spl_info(params->imagename))
                goto err_spl_info;
  
-	spl_params.init_file = params->datafile;
+       spl_params.images[0].file = params->datafile;
+       for (i = 1; i < ARRAY_SIZE(spl_params.images); i++) {
+               spl_params.images[i].file =
+                               strchr(spl_params.images[i - 1].file, ':');
+               if (!spl_params.images[i].file)
+                       break;
  
-	spl_params.boot_file = strchr(spl_params.init_file, ':');
-       if (spl_params.boot_file) {
-               *spl_params.boot_file = '\0';
-               spl_params.boot_file += 1;
+               *spl_params.images[i].file = '\0';
+               spl_params.images[i].file += 1;
        }
  
-	size = rkcommon_get_aligned_filesize(params, spl_params.init_file);
-       if (size < 0)
-               return EXIT_FAILURE;
-       spl_params.init_size = size;
+       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(spl_params.images); i++) {
+               if (!spl_params.images[i].file)
+                       break;
  
-	/* Boot file is optional, and only for back-to-bootrom functionality. */
-       if (spl_params.boot_file) {
-               size = rkcommon_get_aligned_filesize(params, 
spl_params.boot_file);
+               size = rkcommon_get_aligned_filesize(params,
+                                                    spl_params.images[i].file);
                if (size < 0)
                        return EXIT_FAILURE;
-               spl_params.boot_size = size;
+               spl_params.images[i].size = size;
        }
  

Can't we merge the two for-loops?

The patch diff makes sense to me :)

Cheers,
Quentin