Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Tue 11 May 03:07 CDT 2021, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>> Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150-microsoft-surface-duo.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150-microsoft-surface-duo.dts
>> [..]
>>> >> +&remoteproc_adsp {
>>> >> + status = "okay";
>>> >> + firmware-name = "qcom/sm8150/adsp.mdt";
>>> >
>>> > For platforms where we have a Dragonboard or similar we push the
>>> > test-signed firmware to qcom/<platform>/. I presume that the Duo
>>> > wouldn't run on the test-signed firmware.
>>> >
>>> > So I think it's better to make this qcom/sm8150/ms-duo/adsp.mdt...from
>>> > the start.
>>>
>>> ms-duo would look odd. How about qcom/sm8150/microsoft/adsp.mdt?
>>>
>>
>> Sounds good to me.
>>
>> I do prefer using the non-split firmware package though (i.e. .mbn), if
>> you don't have it you can repack the .mdt + .bNN files using
>>
>> https://github.com/andersson/pil-squasher
>
> Cool, I'll check if we have the non-split version and rename the FW
> files.
doesn't seem like pil-squasher works with our slpi image. Gives me a
0-byte image :-)
I would rather not touch the binaries if I can avoid it, though. Is this
a strong requirement to use mbn rather than mdt?
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
