Patch Set 25:

I brought [bincfg] up early in the discussion of this effort. The main counterargument was that just throwing binary files around is dead simple (and won't fail with vendors adding some custom flags somewhere or whatever).

We could document a workflow with bincfg to edit the binaries, though.

I guess this boils down to: should we get the binary representation in (and do whatever is necessary to make editing a painless experience, better than it is now) or do we need to investigate a text format we want to use (bincfg or anything else) as part of the build process?

I'd vote for not checking binaries into the coreboot source tree at all. Personally, I'd like to get rid of the vbt binaries and have a tool to compile them as well. My understanding was that there wasn't documentation for the VBT fields, but it seems that maybe this is no longer the case. [1]

I agree that distributing binaries is much easier than text, which is why we deal with so many blobs. We have a make process to build the coreboot source, so let's just continue using it.

As far as vendors adding custom flags, I don't see how binary vs text solves any problem there.

[1]: https://github.com/ZoranStojsavljevic/Video-BIOS-Table-parser-assembler

View Change

To view, visit change 44775. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.