Re: update firmware binary for v5.4

On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 10:43:14PM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
> 
> On 11/19/2025 10:10 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 09:49:17PM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 11/19/2025 8:22 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 07:57:30PM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
> > > > > Hello Dmitry,
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 11/19/2025 4:55 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 05:39:43PM +0800, Renjiang Han wrote:
> > > > > qcs615 while venus.mbn would continue on sc7280, but then we wanted to use
> > > > > same bins for sc7180 and qcs615.
> > > > 
> > > > What is the status of the current venus-5.4/venus.mbn file? Does it work
> > > > AS IS on Talos EVK that is being in process of upstreaming and on QCS615
> > > > ADP AIR aka RIDE boards?
> > > 
> > > @Renjiang ?
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > S2 variant can be produced now by re-signing this venus.mbn itself. To
> > > > > achieve this part, there were some elf alignment fixes, which is done with
> > > > > this bin to make it re-signable with any vendor specific #.
> > > > 
> > > > I thought that this already happened for VIDEO.VE.5.4-00060-PROD-1. What
> > > > is the difference between it and the new one?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > VIDEO.VE.5.4-00060-PROD-1 had ELF 4k alignment issue [1].
> > 
> > Commit 891a8d4fdfef ("qcom: venus-5.4: update firmware binary for sc7180
> > and qcs615") left me in assumption that at that point the
> > qcom/venus-5.4/venus.mbn has been working on QCS615. Is my assumption
> > incorrect?
> 
> Both #60 and #62 works on QCS615, while if any OEM tries to resign #60 with
> a different signature, they would not be able to do that with #60, while
> they can do that now with #62 with the ELF alignment fixed.

The commit that I mentioned had 0059, not 0060. Also, if the ODMs can't
resign the binary, how could you sign it?

Is the following correct:
- 0058 works only on SC7180 (does it work with the SM6150/Android?)
- 0058's venus_s6.mbn was signed with MBN v6 to work on QCS615
- 0059 was updated to work on both SC7180 and QCS615
- 0060 was uploaded as 'yet another binary to get it working on QCS615'
- 0062 now it's another binary, which works on QCS615 and can be
  resigned by ODMs

Is that correct? If not, then your colleagues need to start writing
better commit messages and being less shy about explaining things:
I basically wrote the summary of the commits chaning qcom/venus-5.4.

And if it is correct, what was wrong with 0059?

> > > 0x34 % 0x1000 is not equal to 0x0 % 0x1000. This part is fixed in #62.
> > > 
> > > [1]RuntimeError: Program Header's Offset, 0x00000034, and Virtual Address,
> > > 0x00000000, are not congruent modulo the Alignment, 0x00001000. (Offset %
> > > Alignment) must equal (Virtual Address % Alignment).

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry