[coreboot] cbfs XIP patch

Myles Watson mylesgw at gmail.com
Tue May 5 17:47:04 CEST 2009

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 9:43 AM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Myles Watson <mylesgw at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 9:33 AM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> So this scenario requires that we have two cbfs file headers, and data
>>> somewhere else, not necessarily contiguous with the
>>> header. Does the cbfstool currently create this kind of image?
>> I don't think so.
> I don't think it does either.
>> I think CBFS requires the header to be contiguous with the data.  We
>> could change it, but that seems like a fundamental redesign.
> Agreed.
>> It would be easier to walk if all the headers were contiguous.
> Agreed. But then you have to leave room somewhere for all possible
> headers, which means you have to reserve part of flash for headers
> only, which is something I would rather not do.

> Many of the proposed changes will result in balooning cbfs code, which
> I think we should avoid. I'm not even sure that arbitrary file name
> lengths (which we have now) are a good idea :-)

I agree.  I think 16 bytes could be plenty...32 if someone complains
that there aren't enough file names in 16 characters.


More information about the coreboot mailing list