-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 349
ext_man: prevent removal of cavs-specific element #3473
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
This patch will allow to keep cavs-specific elements Signed-off-by: Adrian Bonislawski <adrian.bonislawski@linux.intel.com>
|
I can see ext_man_cavs_config in .fw_metadata now. |
|
I have a question on .fw_ready section as well. And 2nd question, parsing extended manifest from linux driver is broken. It reads wrong MAGIC NUMBER and return failure. We should get 0x6e614d58 but 0x44504324. After inspection of the data, it has totally corrupted data. (I'm testing with CML Helios) From my kernel debugging log, |
Why? We should rather prepare to removing data from there, it's why data from fw_ready/fw_ready_metadata has been ported to ext_manifest to make it fully functional. Adding compile-time known elements to fw_ready_metadata is deprecated (leads to unnecessary FW binary growth). Some exception may be, when something is not known at compilation time, eg. some HW specific staff, then fw_ready_metadata may be right place for such a thing.
This number it's |
lgirdwood
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@abonislawski Not following the commit message. This looks like we are adding config to a linker section (which one) for parsing by the kernel at FW load ?
@kv2019i @fredoh9 are all the kernel pieces in place ?
|
@lgirdwood we are adding EXTERN info, to inform linker that this variable is used and prevent from deleting unused variables because in fact ext manifest structs are not used anywhere and linker will not include them. |
|
@abonislawski sorry, I was asking why we are adding this data (who will use it). My understanding is that @kv2019i would like to integrate the kernel parts of the extended manifest after v1.6 (so this may pend on a kernel patch too) ? |
|
@lgirdwood this PR is more like fix for this PR #2893 to work properly, we can merge this anytime we want because ext_manifest is not included without PR #2957 (this one is waiting for a proper time) |
|
I wasn't clear about FW_READY metadata vs extended manifest. Ever since i saw Without PR #2957, if ext manifest not included, then thesofproject/linux#2434 is not v1.6 release blocker. I agree, it won't break any kernel driver. I will remove "DON'T merge this PR yet" comment. |
|
@abonislawski ok, whats the plan for #2957 ? @kv2019i is now good or extended manifest ? |
This patch will allow to keep cavs-specific elements