Aaron Durbin has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37262 )
Change subject: util: cbfstool: Check alignment at build time ......................................................................
Patch Set 11:
(3 comments)
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37262/11//COMMIT_MSG Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37262/11//COMMIT_MSG@17 PS11, Line 17: don't need to : be aligned, add a '%' after section What was the reasoning for choosing this vs explicitly noting aligned sections? Is the alignment magnitude implicit? Or provided by the offset?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37262/11/Documentation/lib/flashmap... File Documentation/lib/flashmap.md:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37262/11/Documentation/lib/flashmap... PS11, Line 114: must be aligned to erase block (e.g., 4k).
an explanation how this erase block size is configured would be useful.
Yes, there are different erase sizes. How is one chosen? I feel like we should be explicit in the alignment and size requirements. This change omits the latter entirely and only looks for implicit offset alignment.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37262/11/util/cbfstool/fmd_parser.y File util/cbfstool/fmd_parser.y:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37262/11/util/cbfstool/fmd_parser.y... PS11, Line 121: 0x1000 We're hard coding 4KiB?