Hi all,
I tried submitting a change for review at https://review.trustedfirmware.org,
but I ran into authentication issues.
1. First try (https):
$ git push origin HEAD:refs/for/integration
Username for 'https://review.trustedfirmware.org': jatron
Password for 'https://jatron@review.trustedfirmware.org':
remote: Unauthorized
fatal: Authentication failed for '
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/'
I tried clicking "GENERATE NEW PASSWORD" in
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/settings/, but I got the following
error message:
An error occurred
Error 500 (Server Error): Internal server error
Endpoint: /accounts/self/password.http
2. Second try (ssh):
I got the following error message when I tried registering a new SSH key
for use with Gerrit. This happened when I clicked "ADD NEW SSH KEY" in
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/settings/.
An error occurred
Error 500 (Server Error): Internal server error
Endpoint: /accounts/self/sshkeys
The error message didn't stop the GUI from recording my key though. My new
key was listed under "SSH keys" after the change. When I ran a git push
command using ssh, I got the following error.
$ git push ssh://jatron@review.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a
HEAD:refs/for/integration
jatron(a)review.trustedfirmware.org: Permission denied (publickey).
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
Am I doing something incorrectly? Any help would be much appreciated. If
this is not the mailing list for these types of questions, please let me
know so I can reroute my email to the proper destination.
Thanks,
Jorge Troncoso
Hi all,
I'm planning to submit a series of patches that aim to improve the
robustness and reusability of the UFS code. The impacted files
are drivers/ufs/ufs.c and include/drivers/ufs.h. The patches mainly consist
of the below changes:
1. Delete asserts. Return error values instead.
2. Add retry logic and timeouts.
3. Remove infinite loops.
4. Reuse ufshc_send_uic_cmd() for DME_GET and DME_SET commands.
5. Add a function ufs_send_cmd() that can be reused in other places.
ufs_send_cmd() calls four functions in
sequence: get_utrd(&utrd), ufs_prepare_cmd(&utrd,
...), ufs_send_request(utrd.task_tag), and ufs_check_resp(&utrd,
RESPONSE_UPIU).
I wanted to give everyone visibility of what is coming up and hopefully
start a discussion around this work. Any early input to help shape the
design would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Jorge Troncoso
Hi all,
I want to write a TA which will be called from the Normal World and be
handled by a specific Trusted OS. Currently, I am using 3 Cactus OS
(provided by TF-A-Tests) in SEL1, and a Hafnium in SEL2. Here is my partial
building cmd
make CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-none-elf- SPD=spmd CTX_INCLUDE_EL2_REGS=1
ARM_ARCH_MINOR=4 PLAT=fvp DEBUG=1
BL33=../tf-a-tests/build/fvp/debug/tftf.bin
BL32=../hafnium/out/reference/secure_aem_v8a_fvp_clang/hafnium.bin
SP_LAYOUT_FILE=../tf-a-tests/build/fvp/debug/sp_layout.json all fip
I have created some EL3 services at services/std_svc, but have not created
a TA.
In my view, to call the TA, I think I should pass (1) the ID of the TA (but
I am not sure how to get the ID) (2) several parameters, which may be
loaded into registers. Here may be a calling process.
ldr x0,=0xdeadbeef // loading ID
ldr x1,=0x11111 // input parameters
ldr x2,=0x22222 // input parameters
smc #0
Then I think I should write a corresponding handler (of the TA) in Cactus
OS. When we call "smc #0", EL3 will trap it, and route it to a specific TA.
However, I don't know how to do it. Can you provide some useful examples?
Sincerely,
Wang Chenxu
Hello,
Last Thursday we got an issue on our @foss.st.com mail server,
preventing us from receiving mails.
The issue was corrected, and I can now correctly receive mails, except
the ones from trustedfirmware.org.
Is there some kind of filtering on trustedfirmware.org side, as those
addresses got error replies?
I've tried to delete my yann.gautier(a)foss.st.com in the trusted firmware
gerrit settings, to re-enter it again, but I cannot receive the
verification e-mail.
Could you check if @foss.st.com addresses are rejected somewhere?
Thanks,
Yann
Hi,
Please find the latest report on new defect(s) introduced to ARM-software/arm-trusted-firmware found with Coverity Scan.
3 new defect(s) introduced to ARM-software/arm-trusted-firmware found with Coverity Scan.
New defect(s) Reported-by: Coverity Scan
Showing 3 of 3 defect(s)
** CID 373165: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
/plat/mediatek/mt8195/drivers/spm/mt_spm_vcorefs.c: 467 in spm_vcorefs_get_vcore()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 373165: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
/plat/mediatek/mt8195/drivers/spm/mt_spm_vcorefs.c: 467 in spm_vcorefs_get_vcore()
461 int spm_vcorefs_get_vcore(unsigned int gear)
462 {
463 int ret_val;
464
465 switch (gear) {
466 case 3:
>>> CID 373165: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
>>> Assigning value from "vcore_opp_0_uv" to "ret_val" here, but that stored value is overwritten before it can be used.
467 ret_val = vcore_opp_0_uv;
468 case 2:
469 ret_val = vcore_opp_1_uv;
470 case 1:
471 ret_val = vcore_opp_2_uv;
472 case 0:
** CID 373164: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
/plat/mediatek/mt8195/drivers/spm/mt_spm_vcorefs.c: 471 in spm_vcorefs_get_vcore()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 373164: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
/plat/mediatek/mt8195/drivers/spm/mt_spm_vcorefs.c: 471 in spm_vcorefs_get_vcore()
465 switch (gear) {
466 case 3:
467 ret_val = vcore_opp_0_uv;
468 case 2:
469 ret_val = vcore_opp_1_uv;
470 case 1:
>>> CID 373164: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
>>> Assigning value from "vcore_opp_2_uv" to "ret_val" here, but that stored value is overwritten before it can be used.
471 ret_val = vcore_opp_2_uv;
472 case 0:
473 default:
474 ret_val = vcore_opp_3_uv;
475 }
476 return ret_val;
** CID 373163: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
/plat/mediatek/mt8195/drivers/spm/mt_spm_vcorefs.c: 469 in spm_vcorefs_get_vcore()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 373163: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
/plat/mediatek/mt8195/drivers/spm/mt_spm_vcorefs.c: 469 in spm_vcorefs_get_vcore()
463 int ret_val;
464
465 switch (gear) {
466 case 3:
467 ret_val = vcore_opp_0_uv;
468 case 2:
>>> CID 373163: Code maintainability issues (UNUSED_VALUE)
>>> Assigning value from "vcore_opp_1_uv" to "ret_val" here, but that stored value is overwritten before it can be used.
469 ret_val = vcore_opp_1_uv;
470 case 1:
471 ret_val = vcore_opp_2_uv;
472 case 0:
473 default:
474 ret_val = vcore_opp_3_uv;
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
To view the defects in Coverity Scan visit, https://u15810271.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=HRESupC-2F2Czv4BOaCWWCy7my0P…
Hi all,
I have a little question, how can I disable the hypervisor mode so EL2 will be just bridge to EL1 ns?
(I mean without touching common ARM code only the platform-oriented code)
Thanks,
Boaz.
________________________________
The privileged confidential information contained in this email is intended for use only by the addressees as indicated by the original sender of this email. If you are not the addressee indicated in this email or are not responsible for delivery of the email to such a person, please kindly reply to the sender indicating this fact and delete all copies of it from your computer and network server immediately. Your cooperation is highly appreciated. It is advised that any unauthorized use of confidential information of Nuvoton is strictly prohibited; and any information in this email irrelevant to the official business of Nuvoton shall be deemed as neither given nor endorsed by Nuvoton.
This event has been canceled with this note:
"No subjects to present this week so cancelling."
Title: TF-A Tech Forum
We run an open technical forum call for anyone to participate and it is not
restricted to Trusted Firmware project members. It will operate under the
guidance of the TF TSC. Feel free to forward this invite to
colleagues. Invites are via the TF-A mailing list and also published on the
Trusted Firmware website. Details are
here: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/tf-a-technical-forum/Tr…
Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.Join Zoom
Meetinghttps://zoom.us/j/9159704974Meeting ID: 915 970 4974One tap
mobile+16465588656,,9159704974# US (New York)+16699009128,,9159704974# US
(San Jose)Dial by your location +1 646 558
8656 US (New York) +1 669 900
9128 US (San Jose) 877 853 5247 US
Toll-free 888 788 0099 US Toll-freeMeeting ID:
915 970 4974Find your local
number: https://zoom.us/u/ad27hc6t7h
When: Thu Sep 9, 2021 4pm – 5pm United Kingdom Time
Calendar: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Bill Fletcher - creator
* marek.bykowski(a)gmail.com
* okash.khawaja(a)gmail.com
* tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi,
When I check the tf-static-checks for the FIP/FCONF series I pushed for
STM32MP1, I have a failure:
1d204ee4a:plat/st/common/bl2_io_storage.c:
['tools_share/firmware_image_package.h
should be in project group, after system group']
First I didn't understand the issue, as the file is in project group.
But the issue is due to previous include:
#include <plat/common/platform.h>
As it is inside include/plat directory, it is seen as a platform include.
For me the files in this include/plat/common directory are more project,
but what is your point of view?
If they are platform files, I should modify my series to reflect that.
If they are project files, then the check-include-order.py script should
be updated.
Here is what could be the correction:
diff --git a/script/static-checks/check-include-order.py
b/script/static-checks/check-include-order.py
index aaf84f1..53d355b 100755
--- a/script/static-checks/check-include-order.py
+++ b/script/static-checks/check-include-order.py
@@ -87,6 +87,8 @@ def inc_order_is_correct(inc_list, path, commit_hash=""):
incs = collections.defaultdict(list)
error_msgs = []
plat_incs = dir_include_paths("plat") |
dir_include_paths("include/plat")
+ plat_common_incs = dir_include_paths("include/plat/common")
+ plat_incs.difference_update(plat_common_incs)
libc_incs = dir_include_paths("include/lib/libc")
Best regards,
Yann
On 7/28/21 10:50 AM, guillaume pivetta via TF-A wrote:
> Hi, I’m trying to implement a secure boot on a STM32MP1 without using
> the FIP file.
>
Hi Guillaume,
Sorry for this very late reply.
> For now , I am not able to use FIP format during the boot process so I
> use a depreciated boot process with TF-Av2.2 as FSBL and U-Boot as SSBL
> to boot my Board.
>
That's quite an old software.
If you can, I'd suggest you update the software to the version delivered
by ST, based on a v2.4 label.
The sources are available there:
https://github.com/STMicroelectronics/arm-trusted-firmware
And you should take the v2.4-stm32mp branch.
In this software, FIP is available, and with a better support for
TUSTED_BOARD_BOOT.
> My boot process do Romcode -> TF-A (BL2) -> SP_min (BL32) -> U-Boot
> (BL33) -> Linux kernel
>
> I succefully implemented signature authentification between U-Boot and
> Linux image, but between TF-A and U-Boot it’s a little bit harder.
>
> I learned on ST wiki how to sign my u-boot binary with the
> STM32MP_SigningTool_CLI, but when I sign my binary with a custom private
> key, TF-A don’t authentified it on boot, even if i tryed to pass my key
> to TF-A at compilation time with the BL33_KEY argument, which i think is
> dedicated to the FIP usage.
>
> I found, in the sources of TF-A, what I think being a developpement key,
> named « arm_rotpk_ecdsa.pem ».
>
> And when I sign my binary with this key, I am able to perform the
> signature check and continu my boot process. So I tryed to change this
> key with a custom one and recompile TF-A to update the key in the final
> binary, but it seem that it is not so simple.
>
> I found yesterday that the auth_mod_init() function wasn’t call because
> I had forgotten the TUSTED_BOARD_BOOT=1 compilation argument. But when I
> activate it, the compilation doesn’t work and i see
>
> « build/arm-trusted-firmware-v2.2/bl2/bl2_main.c:91: undefined reference
> to `auth_mod_init' »
>
> Whitch traditionnaly append when linker don’t find the .o where the
> functions are implemented.
>
> I would like to know if it is possible to implement some kind of
> authentification with custom keys without FIP and if yes where can i
> find some hints/ressources/tutorial ?
>
> I don’t find a lot of ressources about secure boot without FIP so I hope
> you will be able to help me.
>
>
If you can switch to a newer software with FIP, you can check:
https://wiki.st.com/stm32mpu/wiki/How_to_configure_TF-A_FIP
Else, the page that could help you is there:
https://wiki.st.com/stm32mpu-ecosystem-v2/wiki/STM32MP15_secure_boot
If you need more help, the better is to use the links given at the
bottom of the wiki pages:
ST Support Center (https://community.st.com/s/onlinesupport) or ST
Community MPU Forum
(https://community.st.com/s/topic/0TO0X0000003u2AWAQ/stm32-mpus).
Best regards,
Yann