[Sound-open-firmware] Signed firmware availability for kbl/cnl

[Jaroslav Kysela]

Dne 24. 07. 19 v 16:41 Pierre-Louis Bossart napsal(a):
> On 7/24/19 8:59 AM, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
>> Dne 23. 07. 19 v 16:22 Liam Girdwood napsal(a):
>>> On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 16:43 +0800, Daniel Drake wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 8:09 AM Pierre-Louis Bossart
>>>> <pierre-louis.bossart at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> I was indeed told a while ago that there was a limited number of
>>>>> KBL-based devices with DMIC, but mistakenly assumed we could avoid
>>>>> dealing with this configuration and Murphy's Law applied of course.
>>>>> we'll have to huddle with our Intel colleagues to figure this one
>>>>> out.
>>>>
>>>> OK, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Is there any update on the release of signed firmware files for the
>>>> other platforms? We are under pressure to return the other unit we
>>>> have to the vendor (which needs the cnl files), but we would like to
>>>> try SOF first.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Apologies for the delay, I hurt my back and was off work for a few
>>> weeks. Signed binaries now on v1.3 github release tag. Will now be
>>> upstreaming into Linux FW repo.
>>
>> Liam, the sizes of signed firmware binaries are a lot different than the
>> unsigned ones (v1.3 tag) which I can build in docker:
>>
>> -rw-rw-r--. 1 perex perex 270336 Jul 24 15:44 sof-apl-signed-intel.ri
>> -rw-r--r--. 1 perex perex 167936 Jul 24 15:44 sof-apl.ri
>> -rw-rw-r--. 1 perex perex 278528 Jul 24 15:44 sof-cnl-signed-intel.ri
>> -rw-r--r--. 1 perex perex 172032 Jul 24 15:44 sof-cnl.ri
>> -rw-rw-r--. 1 perex perex 278528 Jul 24 15:44 sof-icl-signed-intel.ri
>> -rw-r--r--. 1 perex perex 172032 Jul 24 15:44 sof-icl.ri
>>
>> Is that ok?
> 
> The firmware used for production is typically built with the Cadence 
> tools, which unfortunately are not available publicly (but can be made 
> available to Intel partners). It wouldn't be surprising if the code size 
> was different due to the use of intrinsics (though 100K seems like a lot 
> indeed).
> 
> Liam, I think we ought to release binaries with the community key as 
> well so that people can use them as is, e.g. on the Up2 board which does 
> not require the Intel production key. Same for GLK Chromebooks.

It would be probably more nice to create a tar ball with all firmware and
topology files bundled with the proper (usual) filesystem location
(/lib/firmware/intel/sof/... and /lib/firmware/intel/sof-tplg/...). So we
(users/distribution packagers) can just use it.

BTW: Do we need UCM config files for SOF, too?

					Jaroslav

-- 
Jaroslav Kysela <perex at perex.cz>
Linux Sound Maintainer; ALSA Project; Red Hat, Inc.