On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:01:18AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Rob, > > On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 10:00, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 1:45 PM Simon Glass <sjg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Binman[1] is a tool for creating firmware images. It allows you to > > > combine various binaries and place them in an output file. > > > > > > Binman uses a DT schema to describe an image, in enough detail that > > > it can be automatically built from component parts, disassembled, > > > replaced, listed, etc. > > > > > > Images are typically stored in flash, which is why this binding is > > > targeted at mtd. Previous discussion is at [2] [3]. > > > > > > [1] https://u-boot.readthedocs.io/en/stable/develop/package/binman.html > > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20230821180220.2724080-3-sjg@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > [3] https://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg626149.html > > > > You missed: > > > > https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/pull/110 > > > > where I said: We certainly shouldn't duplicate the existing partitions > > bindings. What's missing from them (I assume we're mostly talking > > about "fixed-partitions" which has been around forever I think (before > > me))? > > > > To repeat, unless there is some reason binman partitions conflict with > > fixed-partitions, you need to start there and extend it. From what's > > posted here, it neither conflicts nor needs extending. > > I think at this point I am just hopelessly confused. Have you taken a > look at the binman schema? [1] Why do I need to? That's used for some tool and has nothing to do with a device's DTB. However, I thought somewhere in this discussion you showed it under a flash device node. Then I care because then it overlaps with what we already have for partitions. If I misunderstood that, then just put your schema with your tool. Only users of the tool should care about the tool's schema. > > I saw this file, which seems to extend a partition. > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm4908-partitions.yaml IIRC, that's a different type where partition locations are stored in the flash, so we don't need location and size in DT. > > I was assuming that I should create a top-level compatible = "binman" > node, with subnodes like compatible = "binman,bl31-atf", for example. > I should use the compatible string to indicate the contents, right? Yes for subnodes, and we already have some somewhat standard ones for "u-boot" and "u-boot-env". Though historically, "label" was used. Top-level, meaning the root of the DT? That sound like just something for the tool, so I don't care, but it doesn't belong in the DTB. > > Re extending, what is the minimum I can do? Are you looking for > something like a "compress" property that indicates that the entry is > compressed? > > I'm really just a bit lost. Me too. Rob
