On 7/9/24 11:24 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hi,
On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 at 01:55, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On 6/27/24 10:19 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hi,
>> Add new binman etype which allows signing both the SPL and fitImage sections >> of i.MX8M flash.bin using CST. There are multiple DT properties which govern >> the signing process, nxp,loader-address is the only mandatory one which sets >> the SPL signature start address without the imx8mimage header, this should be >> SPL text base. The key material can be configured using optional DT properties >> nxp,srk-table, nxp,csf-crt, nxp,img-crt, all of which default the key material >> names generated by CST tool scripts. The nxp,unlock property can be used to >> unlock CAAM access in SPL section. >> >> Reviewed-by: Tim Harvey tharvey@gateworks.com >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut marex@denx.de > > Applied the series, thanks.
This lacks tests - can you please add sufficient tests in ftest.py to get the cover coverage back to 100%? Please try 'binman test -T' to see this.
Any thoughts on this, please? At present -master is broken for one file and -next has three problems.
It is in the pipeline.
What exactly is the error you observe ?
When I run binman test -T , I get a lot of output, but no error reports?
Sorry I somehow missed this email.
The tests are in ftest.py - there are lots of examples, e.g. testXilinxBootgenSigning() - commit d8a2d3b29
This seems to be testing some out-of-tree tool , not binman ?
It is testing the etype, which needs the tool to be present, yes, You can use 'binman tool -f' to fetch tools if you want to try that one.
I'm not getting anywhere with this, can you please draft some example patch how the fix should look like? Otherwise, this is not going to move anywhere I'm afraid.
Thanks