[S] Change in coreboot[master]: util/amdfwtool: Support multiple firmware identifier types

[Karthik Ramasubramanian (Code Review)]

Attention is currently required from: Bao Zheng, Felix Held, Martin Roth, Matt DeVillier, Paul Menzel, Raul Rangel, Tim Van Patten.

Karthik Ramasubramanian has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/76585?usp=email )

Change subject: util/amdfwtool: Support multiple firmware identifier types
......................................................................

Patch Set 7:

(3 comments)

Commit Message:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/76585/comment/43102203_9ce72953 :
PS6, Line 10: only one kind of identifier
> Maybe: […]

Done

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/76585/comment/58ebeb36_8f40cf40 :
PS6, Line 11: UUID
> Excuse my ignorance, it’s not clear to me why fwid is not unique compared to UUID. […]

It does not say FWID is not unique. It is just that AMD is adopting UUID for some of the binaries and that list of binaries will be growing in the future. It is a gradual shift and not a total shift.

File util/amdfwtool/amdfwtool.h:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/76585/comment/c5f7b678_78d60efd :
PS6, Line 333: typedef enum _fwid_type {
             : 	FWID_TYPE_FWID = 0,
             : 	FWID_TYPE_UUID,
             : } fwid_type_t;
> The naming is a bit confusing to me, why a UUID should not be a FWID. […]

The firmware binary types are identified using 2 different type of identifiers:
1) 2 bytes FWID
2) 16 bytes UUID

UUID is used as an identifier only for certain binaries and not all. That is why both the types of identifiers have to be supported. There are no datasheets or consistent identification scheme to add a supporting comment. Currently this is evolving on per SoC basis and hence is configured in SoC's fw.cfg