Kyösti Mälkki has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37895 )
Change subject: arch/x86: Top align bootblock program ......................................................................
Patch Set 4:
(1 comment)
Patch Set 4:
Patch Set 4:
The release requirement of !ROMCC_BOOTBLOCK triggered a side-effect when moving from top-aligned to bottom-aligned bootblock, there were some complaints of no longer being able to fit TianoCore payload on some installations with extremely tight SPI flash usage.
This commit targets for removal of a static C_ENV_BOOTBLOCK size. On my loal development trees I have tied the development of reduced-topology static devicetree for the bootblock to this, as well as development for 'CBMEM_CONSOLE-only bootblock, complex-console romstage with replay from CBMEM_CONSOLE'
On your request, this is now put on indefinete hold as well and is waiting for amd/picasso to progress.
Sorry. I wasn't trying to suggest stopping anything. I was responding to your specific question of adding new sections, but it sounds like my response was taken as sweeping for the whole patch. What are the conflicting changes in this patch vs development of another patch? Can they not proceed in tandem?
CB:37490 adds new references to C_ENV_BOOTBLOCK_SIZE. It is not meaningful to try to optimise the actual .text size of bootblock.elf while the allocation from CBFS is a static Kconfig.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37895/4//COMMIT_MSG Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37895/4//COMMIT_MSG@8 PS4, Line 8:
I think it would be helpful to have more elaborate description explaining reasoning, fixing regressi […]
Will do when I next have a meaningful chance to rebase on a branch with up-to-date amd/picasso work.