Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

td-layout: move payload to the start of image file #679

Conversation

gaojiaqi7
Copy link
Member

When the payload is loaded into physical memory rather than the ROM space, image-rom mapping of other regions will not be affected if payload is at the start of the image file.

When the payload is loaded into physical memory rather than the ROM space,
image-rom mapping of other regions will not be affected if payload is at
the start of the image file.

Signed-off-by: Jiaqi Gao <[email protected]>
As the payload is moved to the beginning part of the image and is no
longer adjacent to B, so the metadata section needs to be modified
according to two cases:

1. If `exec-payload-section` feature is set, load payload in `Payload`
   section.
2. If the feature is not set, load payload into another `BFV` section.

Signed-off-by: Jiaqi Gao <[email protected]>
@jyao1
Copy link
Member

jyao1 commented Apr 1, 2024

This is not what we have discussed.
I proposed to add large_payload section in front, and keep original layout as is.

@gaojiaqi7
Copy link
Member Author

This is not what we have discussed. I proposed to add large_payload section in front, and keep original layout as is.

The reason is adding a new section bring lots of changes in implemetation:

  1. build time: where to put the payload image - payload or large_payload?
  2. build time: which payload section will be adding into metadata?
  3. runtime: where td-shim can find the payload image?

For the metadata offset issue we have discussed, two approaches use the same way to locate the metadata: metadata offset - sizeof payload section.

So I think moving the payload section to the begining of image file will be a better approach in implementation. Do you have any concern on this?

@gaojiaqi7 gaojiaqi7 closed this May 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants