Re: update firmware binary for v5.4

Renjiang Han <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.lore.linux-firmware
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 11/21/2025 7:55 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 03:17:24PM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
>> On 11/21/2025 9:27 AM, Renjiang Han wrote:
>>> Hi Dmitry & Vikash
>>>
>>> I have re-submitted two changes, please help check. Thanks!
>>>
>>> The following changes since commit
>>> 6fc940781a013ad837ed8fea326d2b897467bbc3:
>>>
>>>     Merge branch 'robot/patch-0-1762826844' into 'main' (2025-11-11
>>> 12:02:02 +0000)
>>>
>>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>>
>>> https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/linux-kernel/linux-firmware.git update-
>>> video-fw-v5.4
>>>
>>> for you to fetch changes up to bb28dcbcf9867ebeda6a41d575656a737c24f32f:
>>>
>>>     qcom: venus-5.4: update firmware binary for v5.4 (2025-11-21 08:55:41
>>> +0530)
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Renjiang Han (2):
>>>         qcom: venus-5.4: remove unused firmware file
>>>         qcom: venus-5.4: update firmware binary for v5.4
>>>
>>>    WHENCE                      |   6 +-----
>>>    qcom/venus-5.4/venus.mbn    | Bin 922216 -> 922312 bytes
>>>    qcom/venus-5.4/venus_s2.mbn | Bin 919008 -> 0 bytes
>>>    3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>    delete mode 100644 qcom/venus-5.4/venus_s2.mbn
>> It was made quite clear to put up the history from versions #58 all the way
>> to #62 in the commit message, still i see commit message does not capture
>> it.
> No, it's not required to capture old history. But it would be nice to
> point out the reasons for the change (conformance to ELF ABI). BTW: what
> is the actual alignment requirement for those segments? E.g. on ARM
> systems code segment must be alisnged at least to 0x4. Likewise data
> segments also should have some alignemnt (again, 0x4 at least, usually
> 0x8 or ox10), otherwise loading data from those segments becomes very
> unefficient.
Correct,the data segment needs to have proper alignment. However,
the alignment value must comply with the ELF specification, which
requires that (Offset % Alignment) equals (Virtual Address % Alignment).
After we discussion and verification, we decided to use 0x4 alignment.
So I will update new binary with 0x4 alignment.
Thank you very much for your comment.

-- 
Best regards,
Renjiang Han
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.