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

[Liam Girdwood]

On Wed, 2019-07-24 at 09:41 -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 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.
> 

I've attached v1.3 binaries to github for all targets built with GCC
now. Size delta exists compared with XCC due to compilation
optimisations for speed and not size.

Liam