Hi Javier,
As discussed during the TF-A call, here are some suggestions/feedback that can be incorporated when time permits based on priorities, schedule, resources etc:
1. Would be good if the test infrastructure(the TPM TA) can compile in AARCH64. I thought I heard on the tf-a call that there already is a Microsoft FW TPM port for aarch64 already. Please let me know if I misunderstood.
2. Would be good if the TPM TA works on FF-A as opposed to proprietary OPTEE API’s.
3. Provide platform hooks in tpm_record_measurement function for a platform to actually extend those measurements to a physical TPM right when they are measured. This is a requirement from a security perspective to not wait until the tpm TA is loaded to be able to extend the measurements into a tpm. I understand this can be done in the platform hook that calls tpm_record_measurement but it is convenient place to put tpm related platform hooks.
4. On platforms that use FCONF, the FW_CONFIG and TB_FW_CONFIG should also be measured since they are images being loaded as well. See arm_bl1_setup.c where these images are loaded but not measured(unless I’m missing something).
Thanks
Raghu
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Javier Almansa Sobrino via TF-A
Sent: Friday, October 9, 2020 10:51 AM
To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-A] Questions raised about Measured Boot + fTPM test case
Hello all,
Following up the question raised yesterday during the TF-A Tech Forum with regards to any modification needed on the Linux Kernel to run the test case that I was presenting (Measured Boot + fTPM service), I double checked today and I ran some tests on system and I can confirm that the test case works with the mainline Linux Kernel, with no modification other than enabling the driver on the DTB.
The modules involved on the interaction with the fTPM (for this particular example) are:
* optee.ko: Allows communication between the REE (unsecure world), the Trusted OS (secure world) and the tee-supplicant (unsecure world).
* tpm_ftpm_tee.ko: Module to communicate with a firmware TPM through a char device. This also includes the reference implementation used on the test case.
In order to use the fTPM service, the test case makes use of IBM's TPM 2.0 TSS, a user space TSS for TPM 2.0 that uses services provided by the fTPM.
I would also like to highlight the following points:
A) The test case is only meant to test the ability of the Measured Boot Driver and a TPM 2.0 compliant device to interact with each other. As such, we are not providing an fTPM meant to be used on a production environment. Instead, we are using an existing reference implementation to which we added support for Measured Boot to fulfil our needs for the test and use it as a functional example. The implementation details on how to interact with a particular TPM device (either firmware or discrete) can differ from the ones used on the test case as those details can be platform dependent. For example, we use an OPTEE TA fTPM on this example, but other platforms might use a discrete TPM or an fTPM running on a different Trusted OS.
B) As stated on the presentation, we are undergoing internal review of the contributions done for the fTPM service to make it compatible with Measured Boot. Once the review is completed and the changes merged into the TPM repo mainline, we will update the TF-A documentation with instructions on how to download and build all the components to run the tests manually.
Please, let me know in case you have any more questions.
Best regards,
Javier
Hi Manish,
I have been able to copy the test app (BL33) to entry point address 0x80020000.
I confirmed from the Debugger that RAM address 0x80020000 is populated. I had to modify imx-atf
makefile target to use the "-data" option as follows:
flash_test_8: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin App.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -data App.bin 0x80020000 -data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
The -data option appears to copy the image at the 0x80020000 address. Now, I think we should
be able to handoff since PC (program counter) is set :
bl33_image_ep_info.pc = plat_get_ns_image_entrypoint();
I don't see any serial console output using an image that works when using u-boot. I am not using
u-boot for certification reasons. Is there some way I can confirm that the handoff is happening from bl31.bin to
the App.bin ? At which BL31 function or module does the handoff occur ?
I don't see my HW breakpoint trigger at location location 0x80020000.
Regards
Ravi
> On Oct 23, 2020, at 9:25 AM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Manish,
>
> Can you please point me to any example or a BL2 module which does the copy to RAM from Flash ?
> Maybe I can try to copy the image to 0x80020000 before exiting BL31 from bl31_main().
>
> The bl31.bin image boot fine on the target board (imx8qm) from location 0x80000000
> to start with. That copy to 0x80000000 must happen as well. I'm not sure where assuming
> its some NXP firmware doing it. Do you know where it could be ?
>
> Regards
> Ravi
>
>
>> On Oct 23, 2020, at 4:46 AM, Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ravi,
>>
>> This is normal behaviour when you RESET_TO_BL31.
>> The loading of images (from flash to RAM) is part of BL2 code and in case of directly jumping to BL31, you need a mechanism to Load these images at proper location.
>> Some platforms have a separate firmware which does this before starting execution of BL31, so that when BL31 hands over to BL33 it gets valid image there.
>>
>> thanks
>> Manish
>> From: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>> Sent: 23 October 2020 05:08
>> To: Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>; Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>
>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>
>> Hi Alexei, Manish,
>>
>> I repeated the test (below) a few times and see the same result.
>>
>> (1) Do I need to copy my BL33 (non-secure) image from
>> flash.bin some how to RAM 0x80020000 entry point address ?
>> Is there any example of how to copy the flash.bin image ? I not sure
>> what address or where to copy it from.
>>
>> (2) Is there some existing debug code that I can use
>> to dump/print the ARMv8 RAM address space from inside
>> BL31.bin ?
>>
>> I only found some TF-A tf_log macros in debug.h.
>> I would like to dump some memory address contents
>> (like 0x80020000) from inside bl31.bin to console just for
>> debugging at run-time.
>>
>>> On Oct 22, 2020, at 4:28 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Alexei,
>>>
>>> I captured the LOG_LEVEL=50 log (attached putty-ser0.log <https://www.dropbox.com/s/bi3hngmljksxl3a/putty-ser0.log?dl=0>) from TF-A bl31.bin.
>>> I see bl31 boots normally but never hands off to the BL33 normal world image (App.bin)
>>>
>>> The flash.bin image I am running is constructed using imx-mkimage <https://source.codeaurora.org/external/imx/imx-mkimage/tree/README?h=imx_4.…> tool with the following target:
>>>> flash_test_7: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin App.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
>>>
>>>> ./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c -flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -p3 -ap App.bin a53 0x80020000 -data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
>>>
>>>
>>> I used UUU tool to flash eMMC with flash.bin on the imx8QM MEK board.
>>>
>>> I inspected RAM using a trace32 debugger SW after using a while (1) to halt the execution at the end of bl31.bin main function (bl31_main()).
>>>> diff --git a/bl31/bl31_main.c b/bl31/bl31_main.c
>>>
>>>> index 92a2027dd..51afb13ea 100644
>>>
>>>> --- a/bl31/bl31_main.c
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> +++ b/bl31/bl31_main.c
>>>
>>>> @@ -147,6 +147,11 @@ void bl31_main(void)
>>>
>>>> * from BL31
>>>
>>>> */
>>>
>>>> bl31_plat_runtime_setup();
>>>
>>>> +
>>>
>>>> + INFO("BL31: leaving bl31_main\n");
>>>
>>>> + INFO("entering while(1)\n");
>>>
>>>> +
>>>
>>>> + while (1) {};
>>>
>>>> }
>>>
>>> It appears that there's no data or image at 0x80020000 just before exiting bl31_main(). See the debugger RAM dump at
>>> address 0x80000000 (bl31.bin entry point) and 0x80020000 (BL33 or App.bin normal world app entry point).
>>> See the debugger output <https://www.dropbox.com/s/revv4qev2ky5djj/ksnip_20201022-153339.png?dl=0>.
>>>
>>> When should the flash image provided in flash.bin get copied to the RAM entry point 0x80020000 ? Should bl31.bin
>>> copy the image from flash to RAM ?
>>>
>>> Can you suggest what could be going on ?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ravi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Oct 22, 2020, at 6:15 AM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ravi,
>>>>
>>>> TFTF image can be built from https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/tf-a-tests.git <https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/tf-a-tests.git>
>>>>
>>>> You can also try to increase TF-A log level by setting LOG_LEVEL=50 and check if BL33 memory region is mapped correctly.
>>>> Before passing control to BL33 and could add code to dump initial memory at BL33 start address to see if the image was loaded with no issues.
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>> Alexei
>>>>
>>>> From: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 19:59
>>>> To: Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>>>> Cc: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>>
>>>> Alexei,
>>>>
>>>> I don't have a DS-5 debugger setup/licensed. I am hoping
>>>> on getting something shortly.
>>>>
>>>> Can you point me to the TFTF image that I can use to
>>>> test the BL33 handoff ?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I'm not familiar at this time.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Ravi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 12:35 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> You can also use TFTF image as BL33.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alexei
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>
>>>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 15:26
>>>>> To: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>; Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>>>>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>>>
>>>>> The best way to figure out whether handing off to BL33 happened or not is by attaching a debugger(DS-5).
>>>>>
>>>>> is there any other A53 (or A72) test image (hello world like) I can validate with to further debug ?
>>>>> - You can use a linux image and device tree to test it
>>>>> Refer to plat/brcm/common/brcm_bl31_setup.c -> "brcm_bl31_early_platform_setup()" function
>>>>> For linux as BL33 payload please use coder under "ARM_LINUX_KERNEL_AS_BL33"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>>>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 12:12
>>>>> To: Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>>>>> Cc: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Alexei, Manish,
>>>>>
>>>>> I tried the following patch to plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c:
>>>>>> @@ -483,11 +486,15 @@ void bl31_early_platform_setup2(u_register_t arg0, u_register_t arg1,
>>>>>> bl32_image_ep_info.args.arg3 = BL32_FDT_OVERLAY_ADDR;
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>> + // DEBUG ONLY - FIXME
>>>>>> + SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> SET_SECURITY_STATE(bl33_image_ep_info.h.attr, NON_SECURE);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* init the first cluster's cci slave interface */
>>>>>> cci_init(PLAT_CCI_BASE, imx8qm_cci_map, PLATFORM_CLUSTER_COUNT);
>>>>>> cci_enable_snoop_dvm_reqs(MPIDR_AFFLVL1_VAL(read_mpidr_el1()));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> }
>>>>> But no luck.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there some way to confirm my bl31.bin is handing off to any BL33 (normal world) test image ?
>>>>> In other words, is there any other A53 (or A72) test image (hello world like) I can validate with to further debug ?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 6:10 AM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ravi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can take a look at arm_bl31_early_platform_setup() in plat\arm\common\arm_bl31_setup.c:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* Populate entry point information for BL33 */
>>>>>> SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info,
>>>>>> PARAM_EP,
>>>>>> VERSION_1,
>>>>>> 0);
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> * Tell BL31 where the non-trusted software image
>>>>>> * is located and the entry state information
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> bl33_image_ep_info.pc = plat_get_ns_image_entrypoint();
>>>>>>
>>>>>> bl33_image_ep_info.spsr = arm_get_spsr_for_bl33_entry();
>>>>>> SET_SECURITY_STATE(bl33_image_ep_info.h.attr, NON_SECURE);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>> Alexei
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 10:57
>>>>>> To: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>
>>>>>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Manish,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The test image should not have any dependency on device tree (dtb?)
>>>>>> for console init.
>>>>>> I used the NXP provided imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb file which should match
>>>>>> the MEK board.
>>>>>> I have tested removing "--data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000" (below)
>>>>>> as well but no luck.
>>>>>> I don't believe PC is getting set to the 0x80020000 entry point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The test image has validated with u-boot using these tftpboot settings:
>>>>>> setenv ipaddr x.x.x.x
>>>>>> setenv serverip x.x.x.x
>>>>>> tftpboot 0xf0000000 App.bin
>>>>>> bootm 0xf0000000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't see any console output on the screen running it with bl31.bin as below.
>>>>>> Is there any debug I can add somewhere to help troubleshoot?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you please provide me instructions on where to patch this missing code :
>>>>>> "SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);"
>>>>>> I can try it to see if any change in behavior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Ravi
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 5:15 AM Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Hi Ravi,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Can you please confirm if control reached "test image" ? I guess, yes, as PC has right value.
>>>>>> > Also, does your "test image" depends on device tree for console initialization?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > One thing i see missing in "plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c +352" is bl33 header initialization
>>>>>> > SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > thanks
>>>>>> > Manish
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > ________________________________
>>>>>> > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>>> > Sent: 21 October 2020 00:10
>>>>>> > To: Ravi Kohli <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>>>>>> > Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>>> > Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Hi Alexei,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I built my TF-A (imx-atf) b31.bin image using the RESET_TO_BL31 build option for the i.MX8QM MEK dev kit.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > make DEBUG=1 RESET_TO_BL31=1 PLAT=imx8qm bl31
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I used the imx-mkimage tool to generate a flash.bin (flash bootable image) with the following target to run on the MEK:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > flash_cortex_a53: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin MyA53Serial.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
>>>>>> > ./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -c -p3 -ap MyA53Serial.bin a53 0x80020000 -p4 --data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Here, I allocated bl31.bin to boot from 0x80000000 and a test image at BL33 (normal world) entry point 0x80020000 (both for Cortex-A53).
>>>>>> > I can see DEBUG console output from the bl31.bin image but no serial output from my test image I am trying to boot from 0x80020000.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 3 0x38000000 -- 0x3bffffff
>>>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 4 0x60000000 -- 0x6fffffff
>>>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 5 0x70000000 -- 0x7fffffff
>>>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 6 0x80000000 -- 0xffffffff
>>>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 7 0x400000000 -- 0x43fffffff
>>>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 8 0x880000000 -- 0x97fffffff
>>>>>> > NOTICE: Non-secure Partitioning Succeeded
>>>>>> > NOTICE: BL31: v2.2(debug):imx_5.4.24_er3-1-g06450210f-dirty
>>>>>> > NOTICE: BL31: Built : 17:33:32, Oct 20 2020
>>>>>> > INFO: bl31_platform_setup is called
>>>>>> > INFO: GICv3 with legacy support detected. ARM GICv3 driver initialized in EL3
>>>>>> > INFO: BL31: Initializing runtime services
>>>>>> > INFO: BL31: cortex_a53: CPU workaround for 855873 was applied
>>>>>> > INFO: BL31: Preparing for EL3 exit to normal world
>>>>>> > INFO: Entry point address = 0x80020000
>>>>>> > INFO: SPSR = 0x3c9
>>>>>> > INFO: BL31: DEBUG: image_type is: normal
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Can anyone please suggest what could be the issue here that I don't see the test image console output ?
>>>>>> > Note, the same test image works fine using u-boot.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Regards
>>>>>> > Ravi
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:43 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Hi Alexei,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Thanks for your reply. I have not verified the RESET_TO_BL1 for imx8qm yet.
>>>>>> > I will try it out and confirm. And, thanks for this suggestion.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Regards
>>>>>> > Ravi
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:12 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Hi Ravi,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Have you tried to use RESET_TO_BL31 build option for your platform?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Regards.
>>>>>> > Alexei
>>>>>> > ________________________________
>>>>>> > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>>> > Sent: 07 October 2020 17:01
>>>>>> > To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>>>> > Subject: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>>> > I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
>>>>>> > I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
>>>>>> > specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
>>>>>> > This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
>>>>>> > a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
>>>>>> > 0x80020000 address ?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Thanks in advance.
>>>>>> > Ravi
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> > TF-A mailing list
>>>>>> > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>>>>> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> > TF-A mailing list
>>>>>> > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>>>>> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> TF-A mailing list
>>>>>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>>>>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>>>
>>> --
>>> TF-A mailing list
>>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi Alexei, Manish,
I repeated the test (below) a few times and see the same result.
(1) Do I need to copy my BL33 (non-secure) image from
flash.bin some how to RAM 0x80020000 entry point address ?
Is there any example of how to copy the flash.bin image ? I not sure
what address or where to copy it from.
(2) Is there some existing debug code that I can use
to dump/print the ARMv8 RAM address space from inside
BL31.bin ?
I only found some TF-A tf_log macros in debug.h.
I would like to dump some memory address contents
(like 0x80020000) from inside bl31.bin to console just for
debugging at run-time.
> On Oct 22, 2020, at 4:28 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Alexei,
>
> I captured the LOG_LEVEL=50 log (attached putty-ser0.log <https://www.dropbox.com/s/bi3hngmljksxl3a/putty-ser0.log?dl=0>) from TF-A bl31.bin.
> I see bl31 boots normally but never hands off to the BL33 normal world image (App.bin)
>
> The flash.bin image I am running is constructed using imx-mkimage <https://source.codeaurora.org/external/imx/imx-mkimage/tree/README?h=imx_4.…> tool with the following target:
>> flash_test_7: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin App.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
>
>> ./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c -flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -p3 -ap App.bin a53 0x80020000 -data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
>
>
> I used UUU tool to flash eMMC with flash.bin on the imx8QM MEK board.
>
> I inspected RAM using a trace32 debugger SW after using a while (1) to halt the execution at the end of bl31.bin main function (bl31_main()).
>> diff --git a/bl31/bl31_main.c b/bl31/bl31_main.c
>
>> index 92a2027dd..51afb13ea 100644
>
>> --- a/bl31/bl31_main.c
>
>>
>
>> +++ b/bl31/bl31_main.c
>
>> @@ -147,6 +147,11 @@ void bl31_main(void)
>
>> * from BL31
>
>> */
>
>> bl31_plat_runtime_setup();
>
>> +
>
>> + INFO("BL31: leaving bl31_main\n");
>
>> + INFO("entering while(1)\n");
>
>> +
>
>> + while (1) {};
>
>> }
>
> It appears that there's no data or image at 0x80020000 just before exiting bl31_main(). See the debugger RAM dump at
> address 0x80000000 (bl31.bin entry point) and 0x80020000 (BL33 or App.bin normal world app entry point).
> See the debugger output <https://www.dropbox.com/s/revv4qev2ky5djj/ksnip_20201022-153339.png?dl=0>.
>
> When should the flash image provided in flash.bin get copied to the RAM entry point 0x80020000 ? Should bl31.bin
> copy the image from flash to RAM ?
>
> Can you suggest what could be going on ?
>
> Regards
> Ravi
>
>
>
>> On Oct 22, 2020, at 6:15 AM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ravi,
>>
>> TFTF image can be built from https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/tf-a-tests.git <https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/tf-a-tests.git>
>>
>> You can also try to increase TF-A log level by setting LOG_LEVEL=50 and check if BL33 memory region is mapped correctly.
>> Before passing control to BL33 and could add code to dump initial memory at BL33 start address to see if the image was loaded with no issues.
>>
>> Regards.
>> Alexei
>>
>> From: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>> Sent: 21 October 2020 19:59
>> To: Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>> Cc: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>
>> Alexei,
>>
>> I don't have a DS-5 debugger setup/licensed. I am hoping
>> on getting something shortly.
>>
>> Can you point me to the TFTF image that I can use to
>> test the BL33 handoff ?
>>
>> Sorry, I'm not familiar at this time.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ravi
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 12:35 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> You can also use TFTF image as BL33.
>>>
>>> Alexei
>>>
>>> From: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>
>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 15:26
>>> To: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>; Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>
>>> The best way to figure out whether handing off to BL33 happened or not is by attaching a debugger(DS-5).
>>>
>>> is there any other A53 (or A72) test image (hello world like) I can validate with to further debug ?
>>> - You can use a linux image and device tree to test it
>>> Refer to plat/brcm/common/brcm_bl31_setup.c -> "brcm_bl31_early_platform_setup()" function
>>> For linux as BL33 payload please use coder under "ARM_LINUX_KERNEL_AS_BL33"
>>>
>>>
>>> From: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 12:12
>>> To: Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>>> Cc: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>
>>> Hi Alexei, Manish,
>>>
>>> I tried the following patch to plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c:
>>>> @@ -483,11 +486,15 @@ void bl31_early_platform_setup2(u_register_t arg0, u_register_t arg1,
>>>> bl32_image_ep_info.args.arg3 = BL32_FDT_OVERLAY_ADDR;
>>>> #endif
>>>> #endif
>>>> + // DEBUG ONLY - FIXME
>>>> + SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
>>>> +
>>>> SET_SECURITY_STATE(bl33_image_ep_info.h.attr, NON_SECURE);
>>>>
>>>> /* init the first cluster's cci slave interface */
>>>> cci_init(PLAT_CCI_BASE, imx8qm_cci_map, PLATFORM_CLUSTER_COUNT);
>>>> cci_enable_snoop_dvm_reqs(MPIDR_AFFLVL1_VAL(read_mpidr_el1()));
>>>> +
>>>> }
>>> But no luck.
>>>
>>> Is there some way to confirm my bl31.bin is handing off to any BL33 (normal world) test image ?
>>> In other words, is there any other A53 (or A72) test image (hello world like) I can validate with to further debug ?
>>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 6:10 AM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ravi,
>>>>
>>>> You can take a look at arm_bl31_early_platform_setup() in plat\arm\common\arm_bl31_setup.c:
>>>>
>>>> /* Populate entry point information for BL33 */
>>>> SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info,
>>>> PARAM_EP,
>>>> VERSION_1,
>>>> 0);
>>>> /*
>>>> * Tell BL31 where the non-trusted software image
>>>> * is located and the entry state information
>>>> */
>>>> bl33_image_ep_info.pc = plat_get_ns_image_entrypoint();
>>>>
>>>> bl33_image_ep_info.spsr = arm_get_spsr_for_bl33_entry();
>>>> SET_SECURITY_STATE(bl33_image_ep_info.h.attr, NON_SECURE);
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>> Alexei
>>>>
>>>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 10:57
>>>> To: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>
>>>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>>
>>>> Hi Manish,
>>>>
>>>> The test image should not have any dependency on device tree (dtb?)
>>>> for console init.
>>>> I used the NXP provided imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb file which should match
>>>> the MEK board.
>>>> I have tested removing "--data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000" (below)
>>>> as well but no luck.
>>>> I don't believe PC is getting set to the 0x80020000 entry point.
>>>>
>>>> The test image has validated with u-boot using these tftpboot settings:
>>>> setenv ipaddr x.x.x.x
>>>> setenv serverip x.x.x.x
>>>> tftpboot 0xf0000000 App.bin
>>>> bootm 0xf0000000
>>>>
>>>> I don't see any console output on the screen running it with bl31.bin as below.
>>>> Is there any debug I can add somewhere to help troubleshoot?
>>>>
>>>> Can you please provide me instructions on where to patch this missing code :
>>>> "SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);"
>>>> I can try it to see if any change in behavior.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>> Regards
>>>> Ravi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 5:15 AM Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi Ravi,
>>>> >
>>>> > Can you please confirm if control reached "test image" ? I guess, yes, as PC has right value.
>>>> > Also, does your "test image" depends on device tree for console initialization?
>>>> >
>>>> > One thing i see missing in "plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c +352" is bl33 header initialization
>>>> > SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
>>>> >
>>>> > thanks
>>>> > Manish
>>>> >
>>>> > ________________________________
>>>> > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>> > Sent: 21 October 2020 00:10
>>>> > To: Ravi Kohli <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>>>> > Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>> > Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi Alexei,
>>>> >
>>>> > I built my TF-A (imx-atf) b31.bin image using the RESET_TO_BL31 build option for the i.MX8QM MEK dev kit.
>>>> >
>>>> > make DEBUG=1 RESET_TO_BL31=1 PLAT=imx8qm bl31
>>>> >
>>>> > I used the imx-mkimage tool to generate a flash.bin (flash bootable image) with the following target to run on the MEK:
>>>> >
>>>> > flash_cortex_a53: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin MyA53Serial.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
>>>> > ./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -c -p3 -ap MyA53Serial.bin a53 0x80020000 -p4 --data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
>>>> >
>>>> > Here, I allocated bl31.bin to boot from 0x80000000 and a test image at BL33 (normal world) entry point 0x80020000 (both for Cortex-A53).
>>>> > I can see DEBUG console output from the bl31.bin image but no serial output from my test image I am trying to boot from 0x80020000.
>>>> >
>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 3 0x38000000 -- 0x3bffffff
>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 4 0x60000000 -- 0x6fffffff
>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 5 0x70000000 -- 0x7fffffff
>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 6 0x80000000 -- 0xffffffff
>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 7 0x400000000 -- 0x43fffffff
>>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 8 0x880000000 -- 0x97fffffff
>>>> > NOTICE: Non-secure Partitioning Succeeded
>>>> > NOTICE: BL31: v2.2(debug):imx_5.4.24_er3-1-g06450210f-dirty
>>>> > NOTICE: BL31: Built : 17:33:32, Oct 20 2020
>>>> > INFO: bl31_platform_setup is called
>>>> > INFO: GICv3 with legacy support detected. ARM GICv3 driver initialized in EL3
>>>> > INFO: BL31: Initializing runtime services
>>>> > INFO: BL31: cortex_a53: CPU workaround for 855873 was applied
>>>> > INFO: BL31: Preparing for EL3 exit to normal world
>>>> > INFO: Entry point address = 0x80020000
>>>> > INFO: SPSR = 0x3c9
>>>> > INFO: BL31: DEBUG: image_type is: normal
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Can anyone please suggest what could be the issue here that I don't see the test image console output ?
>>>> > Note, the same test image works fine using u-boot.
>>>> >
>>>> > Regards
>>>> > Ravi
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:43 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi Alexei,
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks for your reply. I have not verified the RESET_TO_BL1 for imx8qm yet.
>>>> > I will try it out and confirm. And, thanks for this suggestion.
>>>> >
>>>> > Regards
>>>> > Ravi
>>>> >
>>>> > On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:12 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi Ravi,
>>>> >
>>>> > Have you tried to use RESET_TO_BL31 build option for your platform?
>>>> >
>>>> > Regards.
>>>> > Alexei
>>>> > ________________________________
>>>> > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>> > Sent: 07 October 2020 17:01
>>>> > To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>>> > Subject: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi,
>>>> > I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
>>>> > I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
>>>> > specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
>>>> > This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
>>>> >
>>>> > Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
>>>> > a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
>>>> > 0x80020000 address ?
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks in advance.
>>>> > Ravi
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > TF-A mailing list
>>>> > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>>> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > TF-A mailing list
>>>> > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>>> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> --
>>>> TF-A mailing list
>>>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi Alexei,
I captured the LOG_LEVEL=50 log (attached putty-ser0.log <https://www.dropbox.com/s/bi3hngmljksxl3a/putty-ser0.log?dl=0>) from TF-A bl31.bin.
I see bl31 boots normally but never hands off to the BL33 normal world image (App.bin)
The flash.bin image I am running is constructed using imx-mkimage <https://source.codeaurora.org/external/imx/imx-mkimage/tree/README?h=imx_4.…> tool with the following target:
> flash_test_7: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin App.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
> ./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c -flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -p3 -ap App.bin a53 0x80020000 -data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
I used UUU tool to flash eMMC with flash.bin on the imx8QM MEK board.
I inspected RAM using a trace32 debugger SW after using a while (1) to halt the execution at the end of bl31.bin main function (bl31_main()).
> diff --git a/bl31/bl31_main.c b/bl31/bl31_main.c
> index 92a2027dd..51afb13ea 100644
> --- a/bl31/bl31_main.c
>
> +++ b/bl31/bl31_main.c
> @@ -147,6 +147,11 @@ void bl31_main(void)
> * from BL31
> */
> bl31_plat_runtime_setup();
> +
> + INFO("BL31: leaving bl31_main\n");
> + INFO("entering while(1)\n");
> +
> + while (1) {};
> }
It appears that there's no data or image at 0x80020000 just before exiting bl31_main(). See the debugger RAM dump at
address 0x80000000 (bl31.bin entry point) and 0x80020000 (BL33 or App.bin normal world app entry point).
See the debugger output <https://www.dropbox.com/s/revv4qev2ky5djj/ksnip_20201022-153339.png?dl=0>.
When should the flash image provided in flash.bin get copied to the RAM entry point 0x80020000 ? Should bl31.bin
copy the image from flash to RAM ?
Can you suggest what could be going on ?
Regards
Ravi
> On Oct 22, 2020, at 6:15 AM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Ravi,
>
> TFTF image can be built from https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/tf-a-tests.git <https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/tf-a-tests.git>
>
> You can also try to increase TF-A log level by setting LOG_LEVEL=50 and check if BL33 memory region is mapped correctly.
> Before passing control to BL33 and could add code to dump initial memory at BL33 start address to see if the image was loaded with no issues.
>
> Regards.
> Alexei
>
> From: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
> Sent: 21 October 2020 19:59
> To: Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
> Cc: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>
> Alexei,
>
> I don't have a DS-5 debugger setup/licensed. I am hoping
> on getting something shortly.
>
> Can you point me to the TFTF image that I can use to
> test the BL33 handoff ?
>
> Sorry, I'm not familiar at this time.
>
> Regards
> Ravi
>
>
>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 12:35 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> You can also use TFTF image as BL33.
>>
>> Alexei
>>
>> From: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>
>> Sent: 21 October 2020 15:26
>> To: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>; Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>
>> The best way to figure out whether handing off to BL33 happened or not is by attaching a debugger(DS-5).
>>
>> is there any other A53 (or A72) test image (hello world like) I can validate with to further debug ?
>> - You can use a linux image and device tree to test it
>> Refer to plat/brcm/common/brcm_bl31_setup.c -> "brcm_bl31_early_platform_setup()" function
>> For linux as BL33 payload please use coder under "ARM_LINUX_KERNEL_AS_BL33"
>>
>>
>> From: rkohli2000 gmail <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>> Sent: 21 October 2020 12:12
>> To: Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>>
>> Cc: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>
>> Hi Alexei, Manish,
>>
>> I tried the following patch to plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c:
>>> @@ -483,11 +486,15 @@ void bl31_early_platform_setup2(u_register_t arg0, u_register_t arg1,
>>> bl32_image_ep_info.args.arg3 = BL32_FDT_OVERLAY_ADDR;
>>> #endif
>>> #endif
>>> + // DEBUG ONLY - FIXME
>>> + SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
>>> +
>>> SET_SECURITY_STATE(bl33_image_ep_info.h.attr, NON_SECURE);
>>>
>>> /* init the first cluster's cci slave interface */
>>> cci_init(PLAT_CCI_BASE, imx8qm_cci_map, PLATFORM_CLUSTER_COUNT);
>>> cci_enable_snoop_dvm_reqs(MPIDR_AFFLVL1_VAL(read_mpidr_el1()));
>>> +
>>> }
>> But no luck.
>>
>> Is there some way to confirm my bl31.bin is handing off to any BL33 (normal world) test image ?
>> In other words, is there any other A53 (or A72) test image (hello world like) I can validate with to further debug ?
>>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 6:10 AM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ravi,
>>>
>>> You can take a look at arm_bl31_early_platform_setup() in plat\arm\common\arm_bl31_setup.c:
>>>
>>> /* Populate entry point information for BL33 */
>>> SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info,
>>> PARAM_EP,
>>> VERSION_1,
>>> 0);
>>> /*
>>> * Tell BL31 where the non-trusted software image
>>> * is located and the entry state information
>>> */
>>> bl33_image_ep_info.pc = plat_get_ns_image_entrypoint();
>>>
>>> bl33_image_ep_info.spsr = arm_get_spsr_for_bl33_entry();
>>> SET_SECURITY_STATE(bl33_image_ep_info.h.attr, NON_SECURE);
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>> Alexei
>>>
>>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> Sent: 21 October 2020 10:57
>>> To: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>>
>>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>>
>>> Hi Manish,
>>>
>>> The test image should not have any dependency on device tree (dtb?)
>>> for console init.
>>> I used the NXP provided imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb file which should match
>>> the MEK board.
>>> I have tested removing "--data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000" (below)
>>> as well but no luck.
>>> I don't believe PC is getting set to the 0x80020000 entry point.
>>>
>>> The test image has validated with u-boot using these tftpboot settings:
>>> setenv ipaddr x.x.x.x
>>> setenv serverip x.x.x.x
>>> tftpboot 0xf0000000 App.bin
>>> bootm 0xf0000000
>>>
>>> I don't see any console output on the screen running it with bl31.bin as below.
>>> Is there any debug I can add somewhere to help troubleshoot?
>>>
>>> Can you please provide me instructions on where to patch this missing code :
>>> "SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);"
>>> I can try it to see if any change in behavior.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>> Regards
>>> Ravi
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 5:15 AM Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com <mailto:Manish.Pandey2@arm.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Ravi,
>>> >
>>> > Can you please confirm if control reached "test image" ? I guess, yes, as PC has right value.
>>> > Also, does your "test image" depends on device tree for console initialization?
>>> >
>>> > One thing i see missing in "plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c +352" is bl33 header initialization
>>> > SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
>>> >
>>> > thanks
>>> > Manish
>>> >
>>> > ________________________________
>>> > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> > Sent: 21 October 2020 00:10
>>> > To: Ravi Kohli <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com <mailto:rkohli2000@gmail.com>>
>>> > Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> > Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>> >
>>> > Hi Alexei,
>>> >
>>> > I built my TF-A (imx-atf) b31.bin image using the RESET_TO_BL31 build option for the i.MX8QM MEK dev kit.
>>> >
>>> > make DEBUG=1 RESET_TO_BL31=1 PLAT=imx8qm bl31
>>> >
>>> > I used the imx-mkimage tool to generate a flash.bin (flash bootable image) with the following target to run on the MEK:
>>> >
>>> > flash_cortex_a53: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin MyA53Serial.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
>>> > ./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -c -p3 -ap MyA53Serial.bin a53 0x80020000 -p4 --data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
>>> >
>>> > Here, I allocated bl31.bin to boot from 0x80000000 and a test image at BL33 (normal world) entry point 0x80020000 (both for Cortex-A53).
>>> > I can see DEBUG console output from the bl31.bin image but no serial output from my test image I am trying to boot from 0x80020000.
>>> >
>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 3 0x38000000 -- 0x3bffffff
>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 4 0x60000000 -- 0x6fffffff
>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 5 0x70000000 -- 0x7fffffff
>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 6 0x80000000 -- 0xffffffff
>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 7 0x400000000 -- 0x43fffffff
>>> > NOTICE: Memreg 8 0x880000000 -- 0x97fffffff
>>> > NOTICE: Non-secure Partitioning Succeeded
>>> > NOTICE: BL31: v2.2(debug):imx_5.4.24_er3-1-g06450210f-dirty
>>> > NOTICE: BL31: Built : 17:33:32, Oct 20 2020
>>> > INFO: bl31_platform_setup is called
>>> > INFO: GICv3 with legacy support detected. ARM GICv3 driver initialized in EL3
>>> > INFO: BL31: Initializing runtime services
>>> > INFO: BL31: cortex_a53: CPU workaround for 855873 was applied
>>> > INFO: BL31: Preparing for EL3 exit to normal world
>>> > INFO: Entry point address = 0x80020000
>>> > INFO: SPSR = 0x3c9
>>> > INFO: BL31: DEBUG: image_type is: normal
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Can anyone please suggest what could be the issue here that I don't see the test image console output ?
>>> > Note, the same test image works fine using u-boot.
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> > Ravi
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:43 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Alexei,
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for your reply. I have not verified the RESET_TO_BL1 for imx8qm yet.
>>> > I will try it out and confirm. And, thanks for this suggestion.
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> > Ravi
>>> >
>>> > On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:12 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Ravi,
>>> >
>>> > Have you tried to use RESET_TO_BL31 build option for your platform?
>>> >
>>> > Regards.
>>> > Alexei
>>> > ________________________________
>>> > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> > Sent: 07 October 2020 17:01
>>> > To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>>> > Subject: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> > I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
>>> >
>>> > I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
>>> > I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
>>> > specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
>>> > This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
>>> >
>>> > Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
>>> > a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
>>> > 0x80020000 address ?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks in advance.
>>> > Ravi
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > TF-A mailing list
>>> > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > TF-A mailing list
>>> > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> --
>>> TF-A mailing list
>>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
Hi Ravi,
You can take a look at arm_bl31_early_platform_setup() in plat\arm\common\arm_bl31_setup.c:
/* Populate entry point information for BL33 */
SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info,
PARAM_EP,
VERSION_1,
0);
/*
* Tell BL31 where the non-trusted software image
* is located and the entry state information
*/
bl33_image_ep_info.pc = plat_get_ns_image_entrypoint();
bl33_image_ep_info.spsr = arm_get_spsr_for_bl33_entry();
SET_SECURITY_STATE(bl33_image_ep_info.h.attr, NON_SECURE);
Regards.
Alexei
________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 21 October 2020 10:57
To: Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com>
Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
Hi Manish,
The test image should not have any dependency on device tree (dtb?)
for console init.
I used the NXP provided imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb file which should match
the MEK board.
I have tested removing "--data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000" (below)
as well but no luck.
I don't believe PC is getting set to the 0x80020000 entry point.
The test image has validated with u-boot using these tftpboot settings:
setenv ipaddr x.x.x.x
setenv serverip x.x.x.x
tftpboot 0xf0000000 App.bin
bootm 0xf0000000
I don't see any console output on the screen running it with bl31.bin as below.
Is there any debug I can add somewhere to help troubleshoot?
Can you please provide me instructions on where to patch this missing code :
"SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);"
I can try it to see if any change in behavior.
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Ravi
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 5:15 AM Manish Pandey2 <Manish.Pandey2(a)arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ravi,
>
> Can you please confirm if control reached "test image" ? I guess, yes, as PC has right value.
> Also, does your "test image" depends on device tree for console initialization?
>
> One thing i see missing in "plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c +352" is bl33 header initialization
> SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
>
> thanks
> Manish
>
> ________________________________
> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Sent: 21 October 2020 00:10
> To: Ravi Kohli <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com>
> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>
> Hi Alexei,
>
> I built my TF-A (imx-atf) b31.bin image using the RESET_TO_BL31 build option for the i.MX8QM MEK dev kit.
>
> make DEBUG=1 RESET_TO_BL31=1 PLAT=imx8qm bl31
>
> I used the imx-mkimage tool to generate a flash.bin (flash bootable image) with the following target to run on the MEK:
>
> flash_cortex_a53: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin MyA53Serial.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
> ./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -c -p3 -ap MyA53Serial.bin a53 0x80020000 -p4 --data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
>
> Here, I allocated bl31.bin to boot from 0x80000000 and a test image at BL33 (normal world) entry point 0x80020000 (both for Cortex-A53).
> I can see DEBUG console output from the bl31.bin image but no serial output from my test image I am trying to boot from 0x80020000.
>
> NOTICE: Memreg 3 0x38000000 -- 0x3bffffff
> NOTICE: Memreg 4 0x60000000 -- 0x6fffffff
> NOTICE: Memreg 5 0x70000000 -- 0x7fffffff
> NOTICE: Memreg 6 0x80000000 -- 0xffffffff
> NOTICE: Memreg 7 0x400000000 -- 0x43fffffff
> NOTICE: Memreg 8 0x880000000 -- 0x97fffffff
> NOTICE: Non-secure Partitioning Succeeded
> NOTICE: BL31: v2.2(debug):imx_5.4.24_er3-1-g06450210f-dirty
> NOTICE: BL31: Built : 17:33:32, Oct 20 2020
> INFO: bl31_platform_setup is called
> INFO: GICv3 with legacy support detected. ARM GICv3 driver initialized in EL3
> INFO: BL31: Initializing runtime services
> INFO: BL31: cortex_a53: CPU workaround for 855873 was applied
> INFO: BL31: Preparing for EL3 exit to normal world
> INFO: Entry point address = 0x80020000
> INFO: SPSR = 0x3c9
> INFO: BL31: DEBUG: image_type is: normal
>
>
> Can anyone please suggest what could be the issue here that I don't see the test image console output ?
> Note, the same test image works fine using u-boot.
>
> Regards
> Ravi
>
>
> On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:43 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Alexei,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I have not verified the RESET_TO_BL1 for imx8qm yet.
> I will try it out and confirm. And, thanks for this suggestion.
>
> Regards
> Ravi
>
> On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:12 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ravi,
>
> Have you tried to use RESET_TO_BL31 build option for your platform?
>
> Regards.
> Alexei
> ________________________________
> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Sent: 07 October 2020 17:01
> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Subject: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>
> Hi,
> I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
>
> I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
> I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
> specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
> This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
>
> Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
> a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
> 0x80020000 address ?
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Ravi
>
>
>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>
>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>
>
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi Ravi,
Can you please confirm if control reached "test image" ? I guess, yes, as PC has right value.
Also, does your "test image" depends on device tree for console initialization?
One thing i see missing in "plat/imx/imx8qm/imx8qm_bl31_setup.c +352" is bl33 header initialization
SET_PARAM_HEAD(&bl33_image_ep_info, PARAM_EP, VERSION_1, 0);
thanks
Manish
________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 21 October 2020 00:10
To: Ravi Kohli <rkohli2000(a)gmail.com>
Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
Hi Alexei,
I built my TF-A (imx-atf) b31.bin image using the RESET_TO_BL31 build option for the i.MX8QM MEK dev kit.
make DEBUG=1 RESET_TO_BL31=1 PLAT=imx8qm bl31
I used the imx-mkimage tool to generate a flash.bin (flash bootable image) with the following target to run on the MEK:
flash_cortex_a53: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin MyA53Serial.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -c -p3 -ap MyA53Serial.bin a53 0x80020000 -p4 --data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
Here, I allocated bl31.bin to boot from 0x80000000 and a test image at BL33 (normal world) entry point 0x80020000 (both for Cortex-A53).
I can see DEBUG console output from the bl31.bin image but no serial output from my test image I am trying to boot from 0x80020000.
NOTICE: Memreg 3 0x38000000 -- 0x3bffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 4 0x60000000 -- 0x6fffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 5 0x70000000 -- 0x7fffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 6 0x80000000 -- 0xffffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 7 0x400000000 -- 0x43fffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 8 0x880000000 -- 0x97fffffff
NOTICE: Non-secure Partitioning Succeeded
NOTICE: BL31: v2.2(debug):imx_5.4.24_er3-1-g06450210f-dirty
NOTICE: BL31: Built : 17:33:32, Oct 20 2020
INFO: bl31_platform_setup is called
INFO: GICv3 with legacy support detected. ARM GICv3 driver initialized in EL3
INFO: BL31: Initializing runtime services
INFO: BL31: cortex_a53: CPU workaround for 855873 was applied
INFO: BL31: Preparing for EL3 exit to normal world
INFO: Entry point address = 0x80020000
INFO: SPSR = 0x3c9
INFO: BL31: DEBUG: image_type is: normal
Can anyone please suggest what could be the issue here that I don't see the test image console output ?
Note, the same test image works fine using u-boot.
Regards
Ravi
On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:43 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> wrote:
Hi Alexei,
Thanks for your reply. I have not verified the RESET_TO_BL1 for imx8qm yet.
I will try it out and confirm. And, thanks for this suggestion.
Regards
Ravi
On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:12 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com<mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
Hi Ravi,
Have you tried to use RESET_TO_BL31 build option for your platform?
Regards.
Alexei
________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
Sent: 07 October 2020 17:01
To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
Subject: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
Hi,
I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
0x80020000 address ?
Thanks in advance.
Ravi
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi Alexei,
I built my TF-A (imx-atf) b31.bin image using the RESET_TO_BL31 build option for the i.MX8QM MEK dev kit.
make DEBUG=1 RESET_TO_BL31=1 PLAT=imx8qm bl31
I used the imx-mkimage tool to generate a flash.bin (flash bootable image) with the following target to run on the MEK:
flash_cortex_a53: $(MKIMG) mx8qm-ahab-container.img scfw_tcm.bin bl31.bin MyA53Serial.bin imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb
./$(MKIMG) -soc QM -rev B0 -append mx8qm-ahab-container.img -c flags 0x00200000 -scfw scfw_tcm.bin -ap bl31.bin a53 0x80000000 -c -p3 -ap MyA53Serial.bin a53 0x80020000 -p4 --data imx8qm-mek-ca53.dtb 0x83000000 -out flash.bin
Here, I allocated bl31.bin to boot from 0x80000000 and a test image at BL33 (normal world) entry point 0x80020000 (both for Cortex-A53).
I can see DEBUG console output from the bl31.bin image but no serial output from my test image I am trying to boot from 0x80020000.
NOTICE: Memreg 3 0x38000000 -- 0x3bffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 4 0x60000000 -- 0x6fffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 5 0x70000000 -- 0x7fffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 6 0x80000000 -- 0xffffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 7 0x400000000 -- 0x43fffffff
NOTICE: Memreg 8 0x880000000 -- 0x97fffffff
NOTICE: Non-secure Partitioning Succeeded
NOTICE: BL31: v2.2(debug):imx_5.4.24_er3-1-g06450210f-dirty
NOTICE: BL31: Built : 17:33:32, Oct 20 2020
INFO: bl31_platform_setup is called
INFO: GICv3 with legacy support detected. ARM GICv3 driver initialized in EL3
INFO: BL31: Initializing runtime services
INFO: BL31: cortex_a53: CPU workaround for 855873 was applied
INFO: BL31: Preparing for EL3 exit to normal world
INFO: Entry point address = 0x80020000
INFO: SPSR = 0x3c9
INFO: BL31: DEBUG: image_type is: normal
Can anyone please suggest what could be the issue here that I don't see the test image console output ?
Note, the same test image works fine using u-boot.
Regards
Ravi
> On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:43 PM, rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Alexei,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I have not verified the RESET_TO_BL1 for imx8qm yet.
> I will try it out and confirm. And, thanks for this suggestion.
>
> Regards
> Ravi
>
>> On Oct 7, 2020, at 12:12 PM, Alexei Fedorov <Alexei.Fedorov(a)arm.com <mailto:Alexei.Fedorov@arm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ravi,
>>
>> Have you tried to use RESET_TO_BL31 build option for your platform?
>>
>> Regards.
>> Alexei
>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>> Sent: 07 October 2020 17:01
>> To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
>> Subject: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
>>
>> Hi,
>> I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
>>
>> I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
>> I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
>> specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
>> This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
>>
>> Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
>> a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
>> 0x80020000 address ?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>> Ravi
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> TF-A mailing list
>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a <https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi All,
The next TF-A Tech Forum is scheduled for Thu 22nd October 2020 16:00 – 17:00 (BST). A reoccurring meeting invite has been sent out to the subscribers of this TF-A mailing list. If you don’t have this please let me know.
Agenda:
* Encrypted FIP Support
* Presented by Sumit Garg
* Summary
* Overview of FIP encryption.
* Common challenges with firmware encryption implementation and how we addressed those in TF-A.
* FIP encryption implementation details.
* Follow on Measured Boot Support in TF-A discussion from last meeting (if required)
* Optional TF-A Mailing List Topic Discussions
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 and being prepared: 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 and shared on the TF-A mailing list.
Thanks
Joanna
Hi Joanna,
Can you please share the presentation of the session on Measured Boot. It
is not currently available on the webpage -
https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/tf-a-technical-forum/
Regards,
Ruchika
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 at 22:58, Joanna Farley via TF-A <
tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> The next TF-A Tech Forum is scheduled for Thu 8th October 2020 16:00 –
> 17:00 (BST). A reoccurring meeting invite has been sent out to the
> subscribers of this TF-A mailing list. If you don’t have this please let me
> know.
>
>
>
> Agenda:
>
>
>
> - Measured Boot Support in TF-A
> - Presented by Alexei Fedorov and Javier Almansa Sobrino
> - Update on the support for Measured Boot in TF-A along with an
> overview of test cases for integration with a TPM service
> - Optional TF-A Mailing List Topic Discussions
>
>
>
> 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 and being prepared:
> 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 and shared on the TF-A mailing list.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Joanna
>
>
>
>
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>
Hi All,
Trustedfirmware.org community project would like to invite you to the Mbed TLS Virtual Workshop on November 3rd (Tuesday) from 2pm to 6pm GMT.
The purpose of the workshop is to bring together the Mbed TLS community including maintainers, contributors and users to discuss
* The future direction of the project and
* Ways to improve community collaboration
The workshop will be hosted in Zoom open to all. The invitation with the zoom link will be send in the Mbed TLS, PSA Crypto* mailing lists in the coming days.
Here are some of the proposed agenda topics. Please reply if there is anything else you would like us or you to present during the workshop that will be interesting to the community
* Constant-time code
* How to be an effective Mbed TLS reviewer
* Processes - how does work get scheduled?
* Roadmap, Mbed TLS3.0
* PSA Crypto APIs
* How Do I contribute my first review.
Thanks,
Shebu
(TrustedFirmware.org Co-Chair,
Mbed TLS Technology Manager)
* https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tlshttps://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/psa-crypto
Hi Biju, Andre,
> sctlr_el3 = 0x0000000030c5183a
The MMU is still disabled since we're so early in BL31, so nothing preventing us
from making an actual access to physical address 0x0.
As Andre already noted:
> x30 = 0x0000000000000000
> elr_el3 = 0x0000000000000000
> far_el3 = 0x0000000000000000
It looks like we do have an errant null pointer dereference here.
If I had to guess, the I-side successfully fetches a 32-bit word from physical
address 0x0, but then fails to decode that bit pattern as a valid opcode. This
is reported as "unknown reason", like you're seeing:
<quote Arm ARM DDI 0487E.a pp D13-2963>
This EC code is used for all exceptions that are not covered by any other EC
value. This includes exceptions that are generated in the following situations:
- ...
- Instruction encodings that are unallocated.
- ...
</quote>
Hope that helps,
Ash.
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Ash Wilding via TF-A <TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Sunday, 11 October 2020 at 18:53
<...>
It looks like we do have an errant null pointer dereference here.
<...>
Just to clarify, when I say "null pointer dereference":
- you may be trampling over your stack, causing you to pop 0x0 into LR and
return there;
- you may be trampling over your stack, causing you to pop 0x0 into a GPR that
is then BLR'd to;
- you may be trampling over some other region of memory containing a function
pointer, causing you to load 0x0 into a GPR that is then BLR'd to;
- etc.
Cheers,
Ash.
Hello all,
Following up the question raised yesterday during the TF-A Tech Forum with regards to any modification needed on the Linux Kernel to run the test case that I was presenting (Measured Boot + fTPM service), I double checked today and I ran some tests on system and I can confirm that the test case works with the mainline Linux Kernel, with no modification other than enabling the driver on the DTB.
The modules involved on the interaction with the fTPM (for this particular example) are:
* optee.ko: Allows communication between the REE (unsecure world), the Trusted OS (secure world) and the tee-supplicant (unsecure world).
* tpm_ftpm_tee.ko: Module to communicate with a firmware TPM through a char device. This also includes the reference implementation used on the test case.
In order to use the fTPM service, the test case makes use of IBM's TPM 2.0 TSS, a user space TSS for TPM 2.0 that uses services provided by the fTPM.
I would also like to highlight the following points:
A) The test case is only meant to test the ability of the Measured Boot Driver and a TPM 2.0 compliant device to interact with each other. As such, we are not providing an fTPM meant to be used on a production environment. Instead, we are using an existing reference implementation to which we added support for Measured Boot to fulfil our needs for the test and use it as a functional example. The implementation details on how to interact with a particular TPM device (either firmware or discrete) can differ from the ones used on the test case as those details can be platform dependent. For example, we use an OPTEE TA fTPM on this example, but other platforms might use a discrete TPM or an fTPM running on a different Trusted OS.
B) As stated on the presentation, we are undergoing internal review of the contributions done for the fTPM service to make it compatible with Measured Boot. Once the review is completed and the changes merged into the TPM repo mainline, we will update the TF-A documentation with instructions on how to download and build all the components to run the tests manually.
Please, let me know in case you have any more questions.
Best regards,
Javier
Hi Biju,
As you work with Renesas platforms, have you also seen
"Renesas rcar-gen3: cert_header_sa6 Compilation Issue"
which I reported on the mailing list on 10/12/2018 and is still not fixed?
tools\renesas\rcar_layout_create\sa6.c has
#include <stdint.h>
which causes compilation error on Yocto 3.13:
| aarch64-poky-linux-gcc -DRCAR_SA0_SIZE=1 -DRCAR_SA6_TYPE=0 -I../../include/lib/stdlib -D=AARCH64 -c -o sa6.o sa6.c
| In file included from sa6.c:7:0:
| /home/alexei/Work/Yocto_3.13_20181205/build/tmp/work/h3ulcb-poky-linux/arm-tf/2.0+gitAUTOINC+19b56cf4a2_556d7d9e3b-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/lib/aarch64-poky-linux/gcc/aarch64-poky-linux/7.3.0/include/stdint.h:9:16: fatal error: stdint.h: No such file or directory
| # include_next <stdint.h>
| ^~~~~~~~~~
| compilation terminated.
| <builtin>: recipe for target 'sa6.o' failed
| make[1]: *** [sa6.o] Error 1
| plat/renesas/rcar/platform.mk:403: recipe for target 'rcar_layout_tool' failed
| make: *** [rcar_layout_tool] Error 2
| ERROR: oe_runmake failed
There's no compilation error with gcc-arm-8.2-2018.08-i686-mingw32-aarch64-elf tool chain, because compiler
searches for <stdint.h> in
\gcc-arm-8.2-2018.08-i686-mingw32-aarch64-elf\lib\gcc\aarch64-elf\8.2.1\include
finding "stdint.h" with
# include_next <stdint.h>
and then getting "stdint.h" from
gcc-arm-8.2-2018.08-i686-mingw32-aarch64-elf\aarch64-elf\include folder.
Trusted Firmware-A Porting Guide reads that
"To avoid subtle toolchain behavioral dependencies, the header files provided
by the compiler are not used. The software is built with the ``-nostdinc`` flag
to ensure no headers are included from the toolchain inadvertently. ",
tools\renesas\rcar_layout_create\makefile has flags defined as:
CFLAGS += ${DEFINES}
CFLAGS += -I../../include/lib/stdlib
and adding "-nostdinc" flag will make gcc-arm-8.2-2018.08-i686-mingw32-aarch64-elf compilation fail because
../../include/lib/stdlib is a wrong path (taken from Renesas ARM-TF version 1.5 "tools\dummy_create\makefile") to
include\lib\libc\stdint.h for version ARM-TF version 2.0.
This issue can be fixed by changing CFLAGS to
CFLAGS += -nostdinc \
-I../../../include/lib/libc \
-I../../../include/lib/libc/aarch64
Regards.
Alexei.
________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Biju Das via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 09 October 2020 08:12
To: Andre Przywara <Andre.Przywara(a)arm.com>; TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>; Madhukar Pappireddy <Madhukar.Pappireddy(a)arm.com>; Joanna Farley <Joanna.Farley(a)arm.com>
Cc: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut(a)gmail.com>; Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2(a)renesas.com>; Prabhakar Mahadev Lad <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj(a)bp.renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-A] commit 75fab6496e5fce9a11 ("libc: memset: improve performance by avoiding single byte writes") causing BL31 boot failure on Renesas RZ/G2 platforms.
Hi Andre,
Thanks for the feedback.
> Subject: Re: commit 75fab6496e5fce9a11 ("libc: memset: improve
> performance by avoiding single byte writes") causing BL31 boot failure on
> Renesas RZ/G2 platforms.
>
> On 08/10/2020 20:05, Biju Das wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > I am porting Renesas RZ/G2M[1] platform to TF-A Master
> > branch(commitid: eeb77da646844) . Initially faced a compilation error [2]
> which is fixed by using "#define" instead of "static const uint64_t".
>
> What is your exact fix? That compilation error sounds like a more serious
> issue, I am scratching my head how such a change would really fix things?
Looks like this issue is related to toolchain, I was using aarch64-linux-gcc-7 on U-buntu 18.04 Host toolchain.
The compilation is error is fixed by the below changes.
#define BL31_RO_BASE BL_CODE_BASE
#define BL31_RO_LIMIT BL_CODE_END
#define BL31_COHERENT_RAM_BASE BL_COHERENT_RAM_BASE
#define BL31_COHERENT_RAM_LIMIT BL_COHERENT_RAM_END
The warning fix should not lead to compilation error with the old toolchains.
It should be backward compatible to the old toolchains right? Please share your views.
> And do you see this with mainline? I tried:
Yes
> $ make bl31 PLAT=rcar LSI=M3 MBEDTLS_DIR=../mbedtls.git on origin/master
> and it built just fine.
Thanks for the hint, After using the toolchain[1], I got the same results as your's. it compiles successfully. So the issue is related to using older tool chains.
[1] https://developer.arm.com/tools-and-software/open-source-software/developer…
>
> > Then on target, found that BL31 is failed to boot[3], which is fixed
> > by reverting the commit 75fab6496e5fce9a11
> > ("libc: memset: improve performance by avoiding single byte writes"), see
> the logs [3].
>
> Mmmh, interesting. Can you build with "DEBUG=1" to get more output from
> BL31?
Sure Will do and provide feedback.
> I see some calls to memset() from code in drivers/renesas/rcar.
> Can you add some debug prints at the top of memset() to dump the
> parameters on each call? To see what breaks it?
OK.
> Are you using memset on some I/O memory, by any chance? And that
> doesn't support all access types, like 64-bit stores?
Will check and let you know.
Cheers,
Biju
Renesas Electronics Europe GmbH, Geschaeftsfuehrer/President: Carsten Jauch, Sitz der Gesellschaft/Registered office: Duesseldorf, Arcadiastrasse 10, 40472 Duesseldorf, Germany, Handelsregister/Commercial Register: Duesseldorf, HRB 3708 USt-IDNr./Tax identification no.: DE 119353406 WEEE-Reg.-Nr./WEEE reg. no.: DE 14978647
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi,
This is to notify that we are planning to target the Trusted Firmware-A 2.4 release during the second week of November 2020 as part of the regular 6 month cadence. The aim is to consolidate all TF-A work since the 2.3 release. As part of this, a release candidate tag will be created and release activities will commence from Friday 30th Oct 2020 (code freeze date). Essentially we will not merge any major enhancements from this date until the release is made. Please ensure any Pull Requests (PR’s) desired to make the 2.4 release are submitted in good time, to be completed by Tuesday 27th Oct 2020. Any major enhancement PR’s still open after that date will not be merged until after the release
Please note, there is no guarantee that all patches under review will be merged before the code freeze date. Any patches that don’t make the code freeze date will complete their review and merge post the release date.
Thanks
Manish Badarkhe
Hi All,
I am getting compilation error with Mainline TFA on renesas platform for bl31 build.
Build command:
#make CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux-gnu- bl31 PLAT=rcar LSI=M3 MBEDTLS_DIR=../mbedtls
Q1) Have any one see this issue? Please correct me, if I am doing something wrong.
On further investigation, the below commit introduced the issue [1]
[1] https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a.git/commit/plat/ren…
It gives compilation error " error: initializer element is not constant" for BL_CODE_BASE [2]
[2] https://elixir.bootlin.com/arm-trusted-firmware/latest/source/plat/renesas/…
BL_CODE_BASE gets its value from linker in [3]
[3] https://elixir.bootlin.com/arm-trusted-firmware/latest/source/include/commo…
If you see [4], the initializer element is not constant
[4] https://elixir.bootlin.com/arm-trusted-firmware/latest/source/include/lib/u…
Error logs:
biju@biju-VirtualBox:~/work/trusted-firmware-a$
CC plat/renesas/rcar/bl31_plat_setup.c
plat/renesas/rcar/bl31_plat_setup.c:25:39: error: initializer element is not constant
static const uint64_t BL31_RO_BASE = BL_CODE_BASE;
^~~~~~~~~~~~
plat/renesas/rcar/bl31_plat_setup.c:26:40: error: initializer element is not constant
static const uint64_t BL31_RO_LIMIT = BL_CODE_END;
^~~~~~~~~~~
plat/renesas/rcar/bl31_plat_setup.c:29:48: error: initializer element is not constant
static const uint64_t BL31_COHERENT_RAM_BASE = BL_COHERENT_RAM_BASE;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
plat/renesas/rcar/bl31_plat_setup.c:30:49: error: initializer element is not constant
static const uint64_t BL31_COHERENT_RAM_LIMIT = BL_COHERENT_RAM_END;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Makefile:1109: recipe for target '/home/biju/work/trusted-firmware-a/build/rcar/release/bl31/bl31_plat_setup.o' failed
make: *** [/home/biju/work/trusted-firmware-a/build/rcar/release/bl31/bl31_plat_setup.o] Error 1
Regards,
Biju
Renesas Electronics Europe GmbH, Geschaeftsfuehrer/President: Carsten Jauch, Sitz der Gesellschaft/Registered office: Duesseldorf, Arcadiastrasse 10, 40472 Duesseldorf, Germany, Handelsregister/Commercial Register: Duesseldorf, HRB 3708 USt-IDNr./Tax identification no.: DE 119353406 WEEE-Reg.-Nr./WEEE reg. no.: DE 14978647
Hi Sandeep,
A few comments inline from a SW architecture/FF-A perspective.
> On 5 Oct 2020, at 12:28, Sandeep Tripathy via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Olivier,
> Appreciate the details. I have a different perception of G0
> interrupts and their relevance to RAS/ critical events.
> Comments in line.
> Thanks
> Sandeep
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 6:47 PM Olivier Deprez <Olivier.Deprez(a)arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sandeep,
>>
>> Here are a few more details.
>> The reasoning differs when considering pre-Armv8.4 platforms (1) vs Armv8.4 platforms onwards with secure virtualization enabled (2).
>>
>> Case (1):
>>
>> EHF framework unifies EL3 exceptions delivered via different vectors and allows them to be handled in a common way. It is also allowing exception delegation handling to lower secure ELs. This framework although primarily used for RAS, is also used for SDEI and platform EL3 interrupts. EL3's role in this case is about trapping and routing the event to appropriate the component (when the interrupt/exception is not handled solely at EL3).
>>
>> The interoperability between EHF and a Trusted OS is not accurately defined apart from this guidance in EHF documentation:
>> "In order for S-EL1 software to handle Non-secure interrupts while having EHF enabled, the dispatcher must adopt a model where Non-secure interrupts are received at EL3, but are then synchronously handled over to S-EL1."
>>
>> Until then for the specific RAS handling scenario, this was delegated to a StandaloneMM partition running at S-EL0 (through the SPM-MM implementation) and not necessarily delegated to a TOS.
>
> Reliability is provided by the feature of G0 interrupt that it can not
> be masked by lower ELs. Such interrupt being handled at EL3 or being
> delegated to other components does not impact the
> reliable feature of G0 interrupt. Sure its handling must be offloaded
> to other components to keep EL3 firmware light. But If it were just
> about handling an interrupt then it could have been entirely handled
> in each state without even requiring an EL3 interrupt type.
Reliability in RAS is a different concept. RAS error interrupts do not provide reliability. They report unreliable operation.
Routing RAS interrupts to EL3 is an implementation choice called Firmware First Handling (FFH). Indeed, the interrupts could be routed to a lower EL which is called Kernel first handling (KFH).
For e.g. an implementation could decide to handle corrected errors Kernel first. Uncorrected errors could be routed to a platform controller instead of firmware or be routed to both. There is no single solution.
With FFH, the main requirement is that an uncorrected error must be handled even if the Normal world is not in a position to do so. There are non-technical requirements too but lets not go there. So I don’t think there is a requirement that "no lower EL" should be able to mask the interrupt.
EL3/S-EL1 and EL3/S-EL2 are at the same privilege level as far as access to the physical address space is concerned. G0 interrupts could be routed to EL3 but they can be disabled by S-EL1 or S-EL2 by programming the GIC distributor.
The main point being that software in all privileged exception levels in the Secure world must be trusted to handle RAS errors in the Normal world. Routing G0 interrupts to EL3 is not a silver bullet.
When support for FFH was added to TF-A, there was no use case to put software in S-EL1. This EL is owned by TF-A which deploys a simple shim layer. The EHF was developed with this assumption in mind.
If your requirement is to put a Trusted OS in S-EL1 and continue doing RAS error handling, then the requirements of the Trusted OS w.r.t the interrupt routing model must be factored in. Hence, the question about what exactly are your requirements.
I can understand the desire to reuse EHF but it cannot come at the cost of not meeting the TOS requirements. It needs a SW architecture discussion first. It might be possible to preempt S-EL1 and route RAS errors to EL3 in some cases. A cooperative model (2) between S-EL1 and EL3 (as Olivier described) is what most Trusted OSs implement today. It would be good to understand why that would not work for RAS.
>
>>
>> In order to better help you, we would need more information on the scenario you intend to achieve, and the environment (Arm architecture version and extensions, GIC version).
>> Or maybe your question was out of curiosity for the longer term approach (2) as described below?
>
> As per sbsa level III spec: sbsa non secure watchdog WS1 (reset) must
> be targeted at EL3. The patch in review ref:
> https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/5495
> And we would want a watchdog interrupt to preempt all execution
> context. I would expect the same with any RAS or SDEI critical prio
> events.
Thanks for pointing this out!
SBSA applies to the Server segment. It was reasonable to assume that Secure firmware almost entirely resides in EL3. Hence the guidance. We will look at rewording this in a future release. The intent is that since it is a Non-secure Watchdog, the WS1 signal must not be masked by the Normal world.
The BSA applies to all segments. It leaves routing of WS1 implementation defined as long as the Normal world cannot mask it. It could be routed to S-EL1 or S-EL2 if that fulfils the requirement.
> Another misc application of our platform is to be able to forcefully
> turn off/ halt/ just ping any core at any execution context (S/NS).
> These motivated me to leverage EHF. But the idea of dropping EHF in
> future designs makes me think now !
>
> Our current system is pre Armv8.4. We will stick to case (1). Case
> (2) ie SPMD was just my quoricity. However, I felt PSA-FFA may
> replace TOS specific SPDs someday.
> Making SPMD relevant in this discussion even with pre 8.4 systems.
> Because at least the TOS will have to follow one policy.
The SPMD is indeed meant to replace TOS specific SPDs. It is meant to cater for the RAS use case as well. From an FF-A perspective, a cooperative approach is simpler. I would like to understand why this would not work for RAS error interrupts as well. Reuse of EHF is an implementation level discussion and I don’t think that is off the table even with (2).
>
>>
>> Case (2):
>>
>> As a general rule, it is preferred that EL3 reduces its footprint and minimises platform specific handling code.
>
> Agreed. Applies to case(1) aswell and heavy lifting to be delegated
> to lower ELs in either security states. My concern is on 'Taking' the
> interrupt handling (mjust)can be delegated.
It would certainly be desirable to reuse the EHF. However, it is not possible to delegate the heavy lifting to preempted software in S-EL1 or S-EL2 without significantly increasing their complexity. This is not the current direction of travel of FF-A.
>
>> EHF framework would most probably not be enabled at all.
>> The priority logic provided by the GIC PMR register to mask NS interrupts cannot really work as before because all of trusted EL3/S-EL2 and untrusted S-EL1 SPs can manipulate this register.
>
> This is a limitation. This can be taken care of by cooperative
> software design. ie. S_EL2/S_EL1 will not set PMR out of its range.
> And the platform defines what's EL3 priority range.
> GIC_LOWEST_EL3_PRI.
This falls under the solution space. It would be good to understand what is it you want to run on S-EL1/S-EL2 first.
>
>> Any secure/non-secure interrupt triggered while running SEL1/SEL0 is trapped first by the S-EL2 firmware (or the so-called SPMC). This translates into SCR_EL3.FIQ/IRQ=0 in the secure world.
>> Group1NS interrupts are redirected to SPMD for routing to NWd.
>>
>> A Group0 interrupt is possibly redirected to a platform driver into an S-EL1 secure partition (e.g. a RAS handling service).
>> Hence it does no longer hold true that Group0 interrupts are necessarily qualified as "EL3 interrupts".
>> It is still possible to redirect Group0 interrupts from S-EL2 to EL3 and be handled there, but as said, this is a less preferred approach.
>>
>> Either way when NWd runs (with SCR_EL3.FIQ=1/IRQ=0), a Group1S/Group0 secure interrupt is trapped at EL3 and routed to SPMD then SPMC.
>> The SPMC can take the decision to resume the secure partition which registered the corresponding secure INTID.
>>
>> This design does mean that SDEI interrupt handling would need SPMC and BL31 collaboration and this is something we are working on.
>
> I understood this scheme. But it means RAS interrupts and other
> critical events will always have blackout periods even with proper
> software design.
RAS interrupts will have blackout periods even if a SMC is handled entirely in EL3. How is routing them to S-EL1 or S-EL2 any different?
Afaiu, the RAS architecture spec does not lay down any time limits on by when an error must be reported. All RAS errors are not critical errors. Even critical errors e.g. uncontainable errors report something that has already happened. With unrecoverable errors, ESBs ensure that the problem is contained to a particular EL or Security state.
Could you elaborate on what timing requirements you have and why a cooperative model would cause problems?
> Whereas with the other routing model scheme the reliability of EHF
> handlers can be retained with the constraint of PMR ranges. There may
> be something
> I am missing.
I don’t think “reliability” is an argument here. It is about reusing the EHF in EL3. It is not off the table but we cannot overlook other evolutions in the software and hardware architecture since the EHF was written.
Let me know what you think.
Cheers,
Achin
>
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Olivier.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Olivier Deprez via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
>> Sent: 28 September 2020 14:01
>> To: Sandeep Tripathy; Soby Mathew
>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; nd
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Query SPD/SPMD behavior with EHF
>>
>> Hi Sandeep,
>>
>> Your question is very valid and we're discussing options internally.
>>
>> We will come back to you with a consolidated answer shortly.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Olivier.
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Sandeep Tripathy
>> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 05:28
>> To: Soby Mathew
>> Cc: Dan Handley; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; nd; Olivier Deprez
>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Query SPD/SPMD behavior with EHF
>>
>>
>> Thanks Soby and Dan for confirmation on TSPD. I can see a few more gaps
>> in the related area.
>>
>> "The EL3 interrupts (G0 interrupts) should be able to pre-empt Fast
>> SMC i.e. any execution context for that matter ".
>> This should apply to all SPDs including SPMD. However I learned from
>> @Oliver that SPMD/SPMC design traps FIQs to S_EL2.
>>
>> In that case a RAS interrupt can be masked by S_EL2 software (eg:
>> Hafnium). Probably by design it will be ensured that S_EL2 will never
>> mask the physical FIQ ?
>>
>> S_EL2 FIQ handler will exit to EL3/SPMD by SMC call. And depending on
>> the pending interrupt type either it can exit to NWd OR invoke el3 fiq
>> vector handler synchronously ?
>>
>> Are there limitations if we trap fiq to EL3 instead ?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sandeep
>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 6:26 PM Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew(a)arm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sandeep
>>>
>>>> Except during yielding SMC ‘disable_intr_rm_local(INTR_TYPE_NS, SECUE);’ is in effect. Intention is to avoid NS interrupt preempt secure execution (Fast SMC).
>>>> But I think that will also disable G0 interrupt as both NS interrupt and G0 interrupt are on FIQ.
>>>> EHF already ensures this by GIC PMR adjustment. So disabling routing model seems unnecessary in this case.
>>>> This is my understanding from the code please confirm if this is correct.
>>>
>>> The EL3 interrupts (G0 interrupts) should be able to pre-empt Fast SMC. Hence the usage of GIC PMR to mask the NS interrupts. As Dan says, the TSP_NS_INTR_ASYNC_PREEMPT predates the EHF design and it seems there is a problem as you describe.
>>>
>>>> EHF already ensures this by GIC PMR adjustment. So disabling routing model seems unnecessary in this case.
>>>> This is my understanding from the code please confirm if this is correct.
>>>
>>> You are right. Routing model manipulation is not required when EL3 interrupts are present as GIC PMR manipulation should take care of the required behaviour for yielding vs atomic SMC. You also need to ensure it works as expected when EL3 interrupts are not enabled and when EHF is disabled.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Soby Mathew
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Sandeep
>>>> Tripathy via TF-A
>>>> Sent: 17 September 2020 16:53
>>>> To: Dan Handley <Dan.Handley(a)arm.com>
>>>> Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Query TSPD behavior with EHF
>>>>
>>>> Hi Dan,
>>>> I am not sure if this is mentioned anywhere in any documents but I think
>>>> EHF handlers should be able to preempt all execution contexts at lower ELs
>>>> and lower ELs should never be able to mask such interrupts.
>>>> If the behavioral expectation is set the implementation can be fixed.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Sandeep
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 7:57 PM Dan Handley via TF-A <tf-
>>>> a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A correction...
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Dan
>>>>>> Handley via TF-A
>>>>>> Sent: 17 September 2020 15:14
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I want to handle something similar in OP-TEED along with EHF
>>>>>>>> depending on
>>>>>>> what is the expected behavior.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm, I thought OP-TEED was more like the
>>>> TSP_NS_INTR_ASYNC_PREEMPT=0
>>>>>> case, where NS interrupts are routed to S-EL1 while processing a
>>>>>> yielding SMC in S- EL1? Perhaps that's a better TSPD config for you to
>>>> follow?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, if EL3_EXCEPTION_HANDLING=1 then obviously NS interrupts are
>>>> routed to EL3 first, but the TSPD re-enables NS interrupts before handing
>>>> over to the TSP to handle yielding calls, via a call to
>>>> ehf_allow_ns_preemption.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right, that is the case for yielding SMC handling where both NS interrupts
>>>> and EL3/G0 interrupts can preempt the S_EL1/S_EL2 context.
>>>> But I would expect the same routing model even for 'Fast SMC' unlike what is
>>>> happening in TSPD.
>>>>
>>>>> Dan.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> TF-A mailing list
>>>>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>>>>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>>>> --
>>>> TF-A mailing list
>>>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>>>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
>>
>>
>> --
>> TF-A mailing list
>> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
> --
> TF-A mailing list
> TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi Varun,
The Arm security support pages provides official responses to questions related to security vulnerabilities. [https://developer.arm.com/support/arm-security-updates]
Trustedfirmware.org provides Security Centre pages covering the security incident handling and vulnerability disclosure process for hosted projects. [https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/security_center/]
You can find information regarding Nailgun on the following Arm security support FAQ page [https://developer.arm.com/support/arm-security-updates/speculative-processo…].
If you have further questions then please email arm-security(a)arm.com<mailto:arm-security@arm.com> as mentioned in the Arm security support pages.
Joanna
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Varun Wadekar via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: Varun Wadekar <vwadekar(a)nvidia.com>
Date: Monday, 28 September 2020 at 21:53
To: "tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-A] Nailgun
Hi,
Recently, I learned about Nailgun [1] – leak information by snooping across privilege boundaries with the help of CoreSight. The proof of concept uses Raspberry Pi3 (uses Cortex A-53 CPUs) platform to demonstrate the exploit.
Has anyone reviewed this attack and does it affect other Arm v8 CPUs too? Do we have support in TF-A to disable CoreSight to mitigate against such attacks? Are there any other mitigations against this attack?
-Varun
[1] https://github.com/ningzhenyu/nailgun
Hello team,
After the recent discussion in the tech forums for the need of a LTS release, I have create a wiki page [1] on tf.org to discuss how we should move forward. The page is expected to be a "live" document and the intention is to allow the community to capture current problems and expectations from the LTS version.
Request you to review the page and provide feedback.
Thanks,
-Varun
[1] https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/lts_proposal/
Hi Ravi,
Have you tried to use RESET_TO_BL31 build option for your platform?
Regards.
Alexei
________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of rkohli2000 gmail via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 07 October 2020 17:01
To: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-A] BL31 as bootloader
Hi,
I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
0x80020000 address ?
Thanks in advance.
Ravi
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
Hi,
I'm a new user and sorry for some basic TF-A questions. Any guidance is appreciated.
I'm am able boot the TF-A bl31.bin image itself on my i.MX8QM MEK platform without using u-boot.
I can use the imx-mkimage tool to create a flash or eMMC bootable image (flash.bin). Here, I can
specify this container image with both bl31.bin and a separate custom app at a give flash address.
This is without any security requirements or dependencies.
Can I use the T-FA bl31.bin image to act as a first stage bootloader (without u-boot) and then launch
a "custom" bare metal app for Cortex-A53 (for example) on the i.MX8QM at the given (BL33) entry point
0x80020000 address ?
Thanks in advance.
Ravi
Hi All,
The next TF-A Tech Forum is scheduled for Thu 8th October 2020 16:00 – 17:00 (BST). A reoccurring meeting invite has been sent out to the subscribers of this TF-A mailing list. If you don’t have this please let me know.
Agenda:
* Measured Boot Support in TF-A
* Presented by Alexei Fedorov and Javier Almansa Sobrino
* Update on the support for Measured Boot in TF-A along with an overview of test cases for integration with a TPM service
* Optional TF-A Mailing List Topic Discussions
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 and being prepared: 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 and shared on the TF-A mailing list.
Thanks
Joanna
Hi,
Sorry for the wide distribution and if this isn't the appropriate board.
I'm interested in TF-A image construction for the i.MX8QM SoC platform
and basic image construction instructions.
I'd like to understand how to deploy a user application for the Cortex-A53
core and flash image construction. For example, how to deploy BL31.bin and
launch a user app for the platform and what does the following TF-A console
log imply for user apps:
INFO: Entry point address = 0x80020000
INFO: SPSR = 0x3c9
Any intro info is appreciated. Thanks again.
Regards
Ravi
Hi Sandeep,
Here are a few more details.
The reasoning differs when considering pre-Armv8.4 platforms (1) vs Armv8.4 platforms onwards with secure virtualization enabled (2).
Case (1):
EHF framework unifies EL3 exceptions delivered via different vectors and allows them to be handled in a common way. It is also allowing exception delegation handling to lower secure ELs. This framework although primarily used for RAS, is also used for SDEI and platform EL3 interrupts. EL3's role in this case is about trapping and routing the event to appropriate the component (when the interrupt/exception is not handled solely at EL3).
The interoperability between EHF and a Trusted OS is not accurately defined apart from this guidance in EHF documentation:
"In order for S-EL1 software to handle Non-secure interrupts while having EHF enabled, the dispatcher must adopt a model where Non-secure interrupts are received at EL3, but are then synchronously handled over to S-EL1."
Until then for the specific RAS handling scenario, this was delegated to a StandaloneMM partition running at S-EL0 (through the SPM-MM implementation) and not necessarily delegated to a TOS.
In order to better help you, we would need more information on the scenario you intend to achieve, and the environment (Arm architecture version and extensions, GIC version).
Or maybe your question was out of curiosity for the longer term approach (2) as described below?
Case (2):
As a general rule, it is preferred that EL3 reduces its footprint and minimises platform specific handling code.
EHF framework would most probably not be enabled at all.
The priority logic provided by the GIC PMR register to mask NS interrupts cannot really work as before because all of trusted EL3/S-EL2 and untrusted S-EL1 SPs can manipulate this register.
Any secure/non-secure interrupt triggered while running SEL1/SEL0 is trapped first by the S-EL2 firmware (or the so-called SPMC). This translates into SCR_EL3.FIQ/IRQ=0 in the secure world.
Group1NS interrupts are redirected to SPMD for routing to NWd.
A Group0 interrupt is possibly redirected to a platform driver into an S-EL1 secure partition (e.g. a RAS handling service).
Hence it does no longer hold true that Group0 interrupts are necessarily qualified as "EL3 interrupts".
It is still possible to redirect Group0 interrupts from S-EL2 to EL3 and be handled there, but as said, this is a less preferred approach.
Either way when NWd runs (with SCR_EL3.FIQ=1/IRQ=0), a Group1S/Group0 secure interrupt is trapped at EL3 and routed to SPMD then SPMC.
The SPMC can take the decision to resume the secure partition which registered the corresponding secure INTID.
This design does mean that SDEI interrupt handling would need SPMC and BL31 collaboration and this is something we are working on.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Olivier.
________________________________________
From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Olivier Deprez via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 28 September 2020 14:01
To: Sandeep Tripathy; Soby Mathew
Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; nd
Subject: Re: [TF-A] Query SPD/SPMD behavior with EHF
Hi Sandeep,
Your question is very valid and we're discussing options internally.
We will come back to you with a consolidated answer shortly.
Regards,
Olivier.
________________________________________
From: Sandeep Tripathy
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 05:28
To: Soby Mathew
Cc: Dan Handley; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; nd; Olivier Deprez
Subject: Re: [TF-A] Query SPD/SPMD behavior with EHF
Thanks Soby and Dan for confirmation on TSPD. I can see a few more gaps
in the related area.
"The EL3 interrupts (G0 interrupts) should be able to pre-empt Fast
SMC i.e. any execution context for that matter ".
This should apply to all SPDs including SPMD. However I learned from
@Oliver that SPMD/SPMC design traps FIQs to S_EL2.
In that case a RAS interrupt can be masked by S_EL2 software (eg:
Hafnium). Probably by design it will be ensured that S_EL2 will never
mask the physical FIQ ?
S_EL2 FIQ handler will exit to EL3/SPMD by SMC call. And depending on
the pending interrupt type either it can exit to NWd OR invoke el3 fiq
vector handler synchronously ?
Are there limitations if we trap fiq to EL3 instead ?
Thanks
Sandeep
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 6:26 PM Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew(a)arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Sandeep
>
> > Except during yielding SMC ‘disable_intr_rm_local(INTR_TYPE_NS, SECUE);’ is in effect. Intention is to avoid NS interrupt preempt secure execution (Fast SMC).
> > But I think that will also disable G0 interrupt as both NS interrupt and G0 interrupt are on FIQ.
> > EHF already ensures this by GIC PMR adjustment. So disabling routing model seems unnecessary in this case.
> > This is my understanding from the code please confirm if this is correct.
>
> The EL3 interrupts (G0 interrupts) should be able to pre-empt Fast SMC. Hence the usage of GIC PMR to mask the NS interrupts. As Dan says, the TSP_NS_INTR_ASYNC_PREEMPT predates the EHF design and it seems there is a problem as you describe.
>
> > EHF already ensures this by GIC PMR adjustment. So disabling routing model seems unnecessary in this case.
> > This is my understanding from the code please confirm if this is correct.
>
> You are right. Routing model manipulation is not required when EL3 interrupts are present as GIC PMR manipulation should take care of the required behaviour for yielding vs atomic SMC. You also need to ensure it works as expected when EL3 interrupts are not enabled and when EHF is disabled.
>
> Best Regards
> Soby Mathew
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Sandeep
> > Tripathy via TF-A
> > Sent: 17 September 2020 16:53
> > To: Dan Handley <Dan.Handley(a)arm.com>
> > Cc: tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> > Subject: Re: [TF-A] Query TSPD behavior with EHF
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> > I am not sure if this is mentioned anywhere in any documents but I think
> > EHF handlers should be able to preempt all execution contexts at lower ELs
> > and lower ELs should never be able to mask such interrupts.
> > If the behavioral expectation is set the implementation can be fixed.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Sandeep
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 7:57 PM Dan Handley via TF-A <tf-
> > a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > A correction...
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Dan
> > > > Handley via TF-A
> > > > Sent: 17 September 2020 15:14
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to handle something similar in OP-TEED along with EHF
> > > > > > depending on
> > > > > what is the expected behavior.
> > > > > >
> > > > Hmm, I thought OP-TEED was more like the
> > TSP_NS_INTR_ASYNC_PREEMPT=0
> > > > case, where NS interrupts are routed to S-EL1 while processing a
> > > > yielding SMC in S- EL1? Perhaps that's a better TSPD config for you to
> > follow?
> > > >
> > > Sorry, if EL3_EXCEPTION_HANDLING=1 then obviously NS interrupts are
> > routed to EL3 first, but the TSPD re-enables NS interrupts before handing
> > over to the TSP to handle yielding calls, via a call to
> > ehf_allow_ns_preemption.
> > >
> >
> > Right, that is the case for yielding SMC handling where both NS interrupts
> > and EL3/G0 interrupts can preempt the S_EL1/S_EL2 context.
> > But I would expect the same routing model even for 'Fast SMC' unlike what is
> > happening in TSPD.
> >
> > > Dan.
> > >
> > > --
> > > TF-A mailing list
> > > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> > > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
> > --
> > TF-A mailing list
> > TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a