Re: [PATCH v3] mhi: host: Add standard elf image download functionality

[Qiang Yu <qiang.yu@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 11:21:11AM +0900, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 09:24:06PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 10:07:01AM +0900, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 03:57:54PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 01:37:12AM -0800, Qiang Yu wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 12:57:11AM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > > > On Sun, Dec 07, 2025 at 10:35:26PM -0800, Qiang Yu wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 06, 2025 at 01:25:34PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 06:33:15PM -0800, Qiang Yu wrote:
> > > > > > > > > From: Mayank Rana <mayank.rana@oss.qualcomm.com>
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Currently, the FBC image is a non-standard ELF file that contains a single
> > > > > > > > > ELF header, followed by segments for SBL, and WLAN FW. However, TME-L
> > > > > > > > > (Trust Management Engine Lite) supported devices (eg. QCC2072) requires
> > > > > > > > > separate ELF headers for SBL and WLAN FW segments due to TME-L image
> > > > > > > > > authentication requirement.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Current image format contains two sections in a single binary:
> > > > > > > > > - First 512KB: ELF header + SBL segments
> > > > > > > > > - Remaining: WLAN FW segments
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > The TME-L supported image format contains two sections with two elf
> > > > > > > > > headers in a single binary:
> > > > > > > > > - First 512KB: First ELF header + SBL segments
> > > > > > > > > - Remaining: Second ELF header + WLAN FW segments
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Download behavior:
> > > > > > > > > - Legacy: 1. First 512KB via BHI (ELF header + SBL)
> > > > > > > > >           2. Full image via BHIe
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > - TME-L: 1. First 512KB via BHI (First ELF header + SBL)
> > > > > > > > >          2. Remaining via BHIe (Second ELF header + WLAN FW segments)
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Add standard_elf_image flag to mhi_controller_config to indicate TME-L
> > > > > > > > > supported image format. When set, MHI skips the first 512KB during WLAN FW
> > > > > > > > > download over BHIe as it is loaded in BHI phase.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > What is standard about it?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The TME-L requires standard elf image format which includes single EFL
> > > > > > > header and WLAN FW segment.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The "standard_elf_image" seems misleading. Since the new image format is
> > > > > > > required for TME-L image authentication, how about using 
> > > > > > > tme_supported_image?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Just elf_image?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Is it too generic for this specific use case. Current image format also
> > > > > contains elf header.
> > > > 
> > > > upload_elf_image?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Nope. What does 'upload' even mean here? The 'TIS and ELF' spec v1.2 clearly
> > > defines that an ELF executable can have only one ELF header. So I'd prefer
> > > 'standard_elf_image' to differentiate it from the non-spec-conformant ELF image
> > > used previously.
> > 
> > What kind of ELF image was used previously? Could you please explain
> > what do 'First ELF header' vs 'Second ELF header' mean here?
> > 
> 
> I don't have the details of it, but Qiang should be able to explain. But AFAIC,
> that was a non-standard ELF image and the new one is going to be spec
> conformant.
>
Previous image format:
ELF header + SBL segments + WLAN FW segments

The TME-L supported image format:
First ELF header + SBL segments + Second ELF header + WLAN FW segments

As per 'TIS and ELF' spec v1.2 Mani mentioned, the previous image format
is also standard elf image. But it doesn't meet the requirement of TME-L
because we need separate elf header for SBL and WL FW for TME-L
authentication.

So the commit message stating "Currently, the FBC image is a non-standard
ELF file that contains a single ELF header, followed by segments for SBL,
and WLAN FW" is not correct and standard_elf_image is not accurate.

Can we avoid saying anything about standard in commit message? Flags eg.
separate_elf_header and tme_supported_image are more accurate.

- Qiang Yu