Hi Daniele,
TBBR specification, from where fip format was introduced, is not very clear about usage of serial number and it can be used in IMP DEFINED manner
"ToC Serial Number - 32 - The serial number of this ToC".
So, theoretically it's possible to use serial number for the purpose you described and it's a valid use of currently (un)used serial number.
Currently, at boot time serial number is checked against a non-zero value, which certainly will hold true if you put a valid timstamp instead of "0x12345678".
IMO you can go ahead and implement a mechanism to feed Build timestamp to be used as serial number.
Thanks
Manish P
________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Manish Badarkhe via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 11 February 2021 11:39
To: Daniele Alessandrelli <daniele.alessandrelli(a)linux.intel.com>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [TF-A] Getting BUILD_STRING from FIP file
Hi Daniele
Please see my replies inline.
Thanks
Manish Badarkhe
From: Daniele Alessandrelli <daniele.alessandrelli(a)linux.intel.com>
Date: Thursday, 11 February 2021 at 11:22
To: Manish Badarkhe <Manish.Badarkhe(a)arm.com>, tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [TF-A] Getting BUILD_STRING from FIP file
Hi Manish,
Thank you very much for the information.
16 bits are not enough to store an epoch, but I'll see if I can encode
some other unique build information into 16 bits.
Just a question, from your answer I assume that I shouldn't use the
'serial_number' field for what I want to do; so I wonder: what is that
field meant to be used for?
'serial_number' field is non-zero number provided by the fip creation tool.
It is hardcoded value i.e. TOC_HEADER_SERIAL_NUMBER=0x12345678 as of now.
Specifically used during the validation of the TOC header in the code.
Regards,
Daniele
On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 10:14 +0000, Manish Badarkhe wrote:
> Hi Daniele
>
> You can use the ‘flag’ field to mention the platform-specific data(in
> your case, a build number). Usage of the ‘flag’ field(64 bit) in the
> toc_header are as below:
> Bits 0-31 -> reserved
> Bits 32-47 -> platform defined data
> Bits 48-63 -> reserved
> You can make use of the flag[32:47] to put build information. I am
> not sure if you can accommodate epoch (converted timestamp) into this
> field but, you can encode any data to fit into this 16bit flag field
> to identify the FIP build.
>
> You can use a build command: fiptool update/create --plat-toc-flags
> <platform defined data> <your fip bin path> to put the platform
> defined data in the FIP image.
>
> Thanks
> Manish Badarkhe
> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of
> Daniele Alessandrelli via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Date: Wednesday, 10 February 2021 at 17:04
> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Subject: [TF-A] Getting BUILD_STRING from FIP file
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there a way to get BUILD_STRING (or a similar string / number that
> uniquely identifies the TF-A build, e.g., BUILD_MESSAGE_TIMESTAMP)
> from
> the FIP file?
>
> Basically, I'm trying to find a way to know the build number of a FIP
> without flashing it.
>
> I've seen that the FIP TOC header has a 32-bit field named
> 'serial_number'. Can it be used to this end? I'm considering
> converting BUILD_MESSAGE_TIMESTAMP into an epoch and adding it as
> 'serial number', but I'm worried that might be an unintended usage of
> the 'serial_number' field.
>
> Regards,
> Daniele
>
>
>
Hi all,
Recently we had an internal discussion on the merits of introducing semantics to commit messages pushed to the main TF-A repository, the conclusion being that we would look to adopting the Conventional Commits<https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/> specification in the near future. There was one major reason for this, which was to help us in automating the changelog in future releases, but it might also help us to dramatically reduce the overall amount of work needed to make a formal release in the future.
This requires some buy-in (or buy-out, in this case) from maintainers because - even though it's to only a relatively minor extent - it does involve an adjustment to everybody's workflow. Notably, commit messages will be expected to adopt the structure defined by the specification, which will be enforced by the CI. Most commits that go upstream today adhere to "something that looks like Conventional Commits", so the change is not exactly sweeping, but any change has the potential be an inconvenience.
With that in mind, I propose the following:
* We collectively adopt the specification, enforced only for @arm.com contributors until such a time that the majority of maintainers are familiar with the new demands
* We suggest - in the prerequisites documentation - the installation of two helper tools:
* Commitizen<https://github.com/commitizen/cz-cli>
* Commitlint<https://github.com/conventional-changelog/commitlint>
Installation of these tools will be optional, but I believe they can help with the transition. In the patches currently in review, they are installed as Git hooks automatically upon execution of npm install, so it requires no manual installation or configuration (other than a relatively up-to-date Node.js installation).
You'll find the patches here<https://review.trustedfirmware.org/q/topic:%22ck%252Fconventional-commits%2…>, and specifically the changes to the prerequisites documentation here<https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/8224/1/docs/…>. Feel free to review these changes if you have comments specifically on their implementation.
Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. If everybody's on board, we can look to have this upstreamed shortly.
Chris
Hi Daniele
You can use the ‘flag’ field to mention the platform-specific data(in your case, a build number). Usage of the ‘flag’ field(64 bit) in the toc_header are as below:
1. Bits 0-31 -> reserved
2. Bits 32-47 -> platform defined data
3. Bits 48-63 -> reserved
You can make use of the flag[32:47] to put build information. I am not sure if you can accommodate epoch (converted timestamp) into this field but, you can encode any data to fit into this 16bit flag field to identify the FIP build.
You can use a build command: fiptool update/create --plat-toc-flags <platform defined data> <your fip bin path> to put the platform defined data in the FIP image.
Thanks
Manish Badarkhe
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Daniele Alessandrelli via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Wednesday, 10 February 2021 at 17:04
To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-A] Getting BUILD_STRING from FIP file
Hi,
Is there a way to get BUILD_STRING (or a similar string / number that
uniquely identifies the TF-A build, e.g., BUILD_MESSAGE_TIMESTAMP) from
the FIP file?
Basically, I'm trying to find a way to know the build number of a FIP
without flashing it.
I've seen that the FIP TOC header has a 32-bit field named
'serial_number'. Can it be used to this end? I'm considering
converting BUILD_MESSAGE_TIMESTAMP into an epoch and adding it as
'serial number', but I'm worried that might be an unintended usage of
the 'serial_number' field.
Regards,
Daniele
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi,
Is there a way to get BUILD_STRING (or a similar string / number that
uniquely identifies the TF-A build, e.g., BUILD_MESSAGE_TIMESTAMP) from
the FIP file?
Basically, I'm trying to find a way to know the build number of a FIP
without flashing it.
I've seen that the FIP TOC header has a 32-bit field named
'serial_number'. Can it be used to this end? I'm considering
converting BUILD_MESSAGE_TIMESTAMP into an epoch and adding it as
'serial number', but I'm worried that might be an unintended usage of
the 'serial_number' field.
Regards,
Daniele
Hi All,
The next TF-A Tech Forum is scheduled for Thu 11th February 2021 16:00 – 17:00 (GMT).
Agenda:
* TF-A: Open-CI Introduction & Status
* Presented by Joanna Farley with support from Linaro OpenCI Enablement Team
* Having a Public CI (Continuous Integration) extensible system has been a goal for a while and this presentation will give an introduction and a high level overview along with the current status. A brief walk through what CI jobs are available, when they are run and how results can be accessed will be shown/demoed. Deeper dives into the OpenCI results and how to analyse will be the subject of future Tech Forum sessions.
If TF-A contributors have anything they wish to present at any future TF-A tech forum please contact me to have that scheduled.
Previous sessions, both recording and presentation material can be found on the trustedfirmware.org TF-A Technical meeting webpage: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/tf-a-technical-forum/
A scheduling tracking page is also available to help track sessions suggested: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/tf-a-tech-forum-scheduling/ Final decisions on what will be presented will be shared a few days before the next meeting on the TF-A mailing list.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/9159704974<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F9159704974&sa=D&us…>
Meeting ID: 915 970 4974
One 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-free
Meeting ID: 915 970 4974
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/ad27hc6t7h<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fu%2Fad27hc6t7h&sa=D&us…>
Thanks
Joanna
All right. Thank you Manish and Olivier for your feedback. You can close this topic. Oliver answered the concern I had regarding implementing a vector table during boot time.
Ian Burres
Cybersecurity R&D
> On Feb 3, 2021, at 3:14 AM, tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org wrote:
>
> Send TF-A mailing list submissions to
> tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tf-a-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TF-A digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: 1023 spurious interrupt (AT&T)
> 2. Re: 1023 spurious interrupt (Olivier Deprez)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 18:15:25 -0700
> From: AT&T <iburres(a)att.net>
> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Subject: Re: [TF-A] 1023 spurious interrupt
> Message-ID: <04497C24-78D2-460F-BCC0-535998937145(a)att.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Yep, I had an O not a zero. Don’t see a difference yet, but that definitely needed to be fixed. Thank you.
>
> Ian Burres
> Cybersecurity R&D
>
>
>> On Feb 2, 2021, at 3:53 PM, tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org wrote:
>>
>> Send TF-A mailing list submissions to
>> tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> tf-a-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of TF-A digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Spurious interrupt 1023 (Ian Burres)
>> 2. Re: Spurious interrupt 1023 (Manish Pandey2)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 14:03:05 -0700
>> From: Ian Burres <iburres(a)att.net>
>> To: Olivier Deprez <Olivier.Deprez(a)arm.com>,
>> "tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
>> Message-ID: <20210202210320.2C48741B32(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> UPDATE: I managed to get the Pi to complete the boot process, which is a major hurdle I have been trying to overcome.
>>
>> As for your questions Olivier:
>>
>> The vector table is loaded during bl31 (its called in the bl31_main.c main() function, right after bl31_platform_setup()). The Pi 4B uses GICv2 (your assumption was correct) and the BCM2711 chip.
>>
>> Right now both my irq and fiq handlers use: ID = gicv2_get_pending_interrupt_id(); to read the INTID.
>>
>> Neither handler does anything else other than print the ID, which returns 1023 for fiq only, using HS_DEBUG(). Nothing returns for irq.
>>
>> Build options are: PLAT=rpi4 DEBUG=1 LOG_LEVEL=50 RUNTIME_UART=2 GICV2_GO_FOR_EL3=1
>>
>> Wasn’t trying to route the UART RX interrupt to EL3, though that’s not a bad idea (FIFO, right?) . However, I have been exploring the idea of generating an ARM timer interrupt (not system timer), but I couldn’t get past the boot issue, which seems to have now been resolved.
>>
>> Questions: Do you see any reason why loading the vector table during the boot process will prevent interrupts from being routed to EL3 correctly? If you do not, then I think I can take it from here.
>>
>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>>
>> From: Olivier Deprez
>> Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 2:36 AM
>> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; AT&T
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
>>
>> Hi Ian,
>>
>> I guess we'll need a bit more details in order to help you.
>> Which platform are you using? which GIC version is it using (looks like GICv2?) ?
>> How did you built TF-A for this platform (command line arguments)?
>> What is executing on your platform (e.g. linux in the non-secure world)? Is there any component in the SWd (apart from EL3 monitor) like a TEE?
>> Are you trying to route the UART RX interrupt to EL3?
>> Is this UART instance only owned by the SWd?
>> How did you setup the interrupt handler?
>> Which function are you using to read the INTID?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Olivier.
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of AT&T via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>> Sent: 29 January 2021 21:08
>> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>> Subject: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
>>
>> I asked a similar question before, but I have since made some headway concerning routing fiq interrupts to EL3. I placed an HS_DEBUG command to print the ID, which returns 1023. The RX signal on one of the attached UARTs causes a solid red light and the debug message continuously loops. When I use the functions from gicv2.h, I receive an assertion error regarding MAX_SPI_ID, but the looping stops.
>>
>> I think the 1023 ID suggests non-secure is receiving a secure interrupt OR I’m dealing with a possible race condition. Any thoughts? Should I attach my code?
>>
>>
>>
>> Ian Burres
>> Cybersecurity R&D
>>
>>
>> --
>> TF-A mailing list
>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>>
>>
Hi,
Stepping back to the initial thread, I now miss the rationale for routing interrupts to EL3.
"I have successfully implement a Linux driver that allows me to dump kernel page tables and memory; however, I cannot see user page tables (even after running a CPU intensive program ). I believe the only way to view user page tables is to have interrupts routed to EL3 – a Linux driver is not sufficient."
If your intent is to dump user process page tables, that's something to do using the linux kernel mm framework, and not necessarily at EL3. Not sure why a "linux driver is not sufficient". More inputs on this may be beneficial.
Nevertheless if you need a service in EL3 to do "introspection", you would rather write a form of SiP service accessed through SMC (not necessarily routing interrupts through FIQ).
As for the code snippets, replacing vbar_el3 with your own vector table looks wrong.
This will break any service call back into EL3 when linux is booted (e.g. PSCI calls....)
If you really want to route interrupts to EL3 you shall use the Interrupt Handling Framework as Manish suggested.
e.g.
uint64_t fiq_handler(uint32_t id, uint32_t flags, void *handle, void *cookie)
{
[...]
return 0;
}
void register_my_interrupt(void)
{
int32_t rc, flags = 0;
plat_ic_set_interrupt_type(intid, INTR_TYPE_EL3);
set_interrupt_rm_flag(flags, NON_SECURE);
rc = register_interrupt_type_handler(INTR_TYPE_EL3, fiq_handler, flags);
NOTICE("register_interrupt_type_handler %d\n", rc);
}
Regards,
Olivier.
________________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of AT&T via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 03 February 2021 02:15
To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-A] 1023 spurious interrupt
Yep, I had an O not a zero. Don’t see a difference yet, but that definitely needed to be fixed. Thank you.
Ian Burres
Cybersecurity R&D
> On Feb 2, 2021, at 3:53 PM, tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org wrote:
>
> Send TF-A mailing list submissions to
> tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tf-a-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TF-A digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Spurious interrupt 1023 (Ian Burres)
> 2. Re: Spurious interrupt 1023 (Manish Pandey2)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 14:03:05 -0700
> From: Ian Burres <iburres(a)att.net>
> To: Olivier Deprez <Olivier.Deprez(a)arm.com>,
> "tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
> Message-ID: <20210202210320.2C48741B32(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> UPDATE: I managed to get the Pi to complete the boot process, which is a major hurdle I have been trying to overcome.
>
> As for your questions Olivier:
>
> The vector table is loaded during bl31 (its called in the bl31_main.c main() function, right after bl31_platform_setup()). The Pi 4B uses GICv2 (your assumption was correct) and the BCM2711 chip.
>
> Right now both my irq and fiq handlers use: ID = gicv2_get_pending_interrupt_id(); to read the INTID.
>
> Neither handler does anything else other than print the ID, which returns 1023 for fiq only, using HS_DEBUG(). Nothing returns for irq.
>
> Build options are: PLAT=rpi4 DEBUG=1 LOG_LEVEL=50 RUNTIME_UART=2 GICV2_GO_FOR_EL3=1
>
> Wasn’t trying to route the UART RX interrupt to EL3, though that’s not a bad idea (FIFO, right?) . However, I have been exploring the idea of generating an ARM timer interrupt (not system timer), but I couldn’t get past the boot issue, which seems to have now been resolved.
>
> Questions: Do you see any reason why loading the vector table during the boot process will prevent interrupts from being routed to EL3 correctly? If you do not, then I think I can take it from here.
>
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>
> From: Olivier Deprez
> Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 2:36 AM
> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; AT&T
> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> I guess we'll need a bit more details in order to help you.
> Which platform are you using? which GIC version is it using (looks like GICv2?) ?
> How did you built TF-A for this platform (command line arguments)?
> What is executing on your platform (e.g. linux in the non-secure world)? Is there any component in the SWd (apart from EL3 monitor) like a TEE?
> Are you trying to route the UART RX interrupt to EL3?
> Is this UART instance only owned by the SWd?
> How did you setup the interrupt handler?
> Which function are you using to read the INTID?
>
> Regards,
> Olivier.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of AT&T via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Sent: 29 January 2021 21:08
> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Subject: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
>
> I asked a similar question before, but I have since made some headway concerning routing fiq interrupts to EL3. I placed an HS_DEBUG command to print the ID, which returns 1023. The RX signal on one of the attached UARTs causes a solid red light and the debug message continuously loops. When I use the functions from gicv2.h, I receive an assertion error regarding MAX_SPI_ID, but the looping stops.
>
> I think the 1023 ID suggests non-secure is receiving a secure interrupt OR I’m dealing with a possible race condition. Any thoughts? Should I attach my code?
>
>
>
> Ian Burres
> Cybersecurity R&D
>
>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>
>
Yep, I had an O not a zero. Don’t see a difference yet, but that definitely needed to be fixed. Thank you.
Ian Burres
Cybersecurity R&D
> On Feb 2, 2021, at 3:53 PM, tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org wrote:
>
> Send TF-A mailing list submissions to
> tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> tf-a-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tf-a-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TF-A digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Spurious interrupt 1023 (Ian Burres)
> 2. Re: Spurious interrupt 1023 (Manish Pandey2)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 14:03:05 -0700
> From: Ian Burres <iburres(a)att.net>
> To: Olivier Deprez <Olivier.Deprez(a)arm.com>,
> "tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
> Message-ID: <20210202210320.2C48741B32(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> UPDATE: I managed to get the Pi to complete the boot process, which is a major hurdle I have been trying to overcome.
>
> As for your questions Olivier:
>
> The vector table is loaded during bl31 (its called in the bl31_main.c main() function, right after bl31_platform_setup()). The Pi 4B uses GICv2 (your assumption was correct) and the BCM2711 chip.
>
> Right now both my irq and fiq handlers use: ID = gicv2_get_pending_interrupt_id(); to read the INTID.
>
> Neither handler does anything else other than print the ID, which returns 1023 for fiq only, using HS_DEBUG(). Nothing returns for irq.
>
> Build options are: PLAT=rpi4 DEBUG=1 LOG_LEVEL=50 RUNTIME_UART=2 GICV2_GO_FOR_EL3=1
>
> Wasn’t trying to route the UART RX interrupt to EL3, though that’s not a bad idea (FIFO, right?) . However, I have been exploring the idea of generating an ARM timer interrupt (not system timer), but I couldn’t get past the boot issue, which seems to have now been resolved.
>
> Questions: Do you see any reason why loading the vector table during the boot process will prevent interrupts from being routed to EL3 correctly? If you do not, then I think I can take it from here.
>
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>
> From: Olivier Deprez
> Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 2:36 AM
> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; AT&T
> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> I guess we'll need a bit more details in order to help you.
> Which platform are you using? which GIC version is it using (looks like GICv2?) ?
> How did you built TF-A for this platform (command line arguments)?
> What is executing on your platform (e.g. linux in the non-secure world)? Is there any component in the SWd (apart from EL3 monitor) like a TEE?
> Are you trying to route the UART RX interrupt to EL3?
> Is this UART instance only owned by the SWd?
> How did you setup the interrupt handler?
> Which function are you using to read the INTID?
>
> Regards,
> Olivier.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of AT&T via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Sent: 29 January 2021 21:08
> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Subject: [TF-A] Spurious interrupt 1023
>
> I asked a similar question before, but I have since made some headway concerning routing fiq interrupts to EL3. I placed an HS_DEBUG command to print the ID, which returns 1023. The RX signal on one of the attached UARTs causes a solid red light and the debug message continuously loops. When I use the functions from gicv2.h, I receive an assertion error regarding MAX_SPI_ID, but the looping stops.
>
> I think the 1023 ID suggests non-secure is receiving a secure interrupt OR I’m dealing with a possible race condition. Any thoughts? Should I attach my code?
>
>
>
> Ian Burres
> Cybersecurity R&D
>
>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>
>