This event has been canceled.
TF-A Tech Forum
Thursday Oct 3, 2024 ⋅ 5pm – 6pm
Central European Time - Paris
We run an open technical forum call for anyone to participate and it is not
restricted to Trusted Firmware project members. It will operate under the
guidance of the TF TSC. Feel free to forward this invite to colleagues.
Invites are via the TF-A mailing list and also published on the Trusted
Firmware website. Details are here:
https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/tf-a-technical-forum/Trusted
Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.Join Zoom
Meetinghttps://linaro-org.zoom.us/my/trustedfirmware?pwd=VktXcm5MNUUyVVM4R0k3ZUtvdU84QT09
One tap mobile+16465588656,,9159704974# US (New
York)+16699009128,,9159704974# US (San Jose)Dial by your location +1
646 558 8656 US (New York) +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose) 877
853 5247 US Toll-free 888 788 0099 US Toll-freeMeeting ID: 915 970
4974Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/ad27hc6t7h
Guests
tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi all,
I am trying to raise a question about SDS.
As you know, SDS (Shared data storage) is used to communicate or exhcange info among different processor units like AP, SCP, RSE, etc.
So, do we need to add some lock mechanisms to protect the data when one processor entity is accessing it? After I reviewed the open source Trusted Firmware and SCP firmware
it looks to me that both Trusted Firmware and SCP directly access the shared memory region without any limitation. Currently, it just uses the 'valid' flag to identify if the data is ready to use,
is this good enough?
Looking forwared to your response! Thank you!!!
Best Regards,
Bob
Hi Marc,
In TF-A, the FF-A version is currently set to v1.2, but I am unable to find the corresponding implementation for EL3 SPMC configuration.
I'm particularly interested in the support for FF-A Notification Mechanism. Could you please provide the timeline for when this will be added to the TF-A EL3 SPMC configuration?
Thank You!
Akshay Belsare
Hello,
I would like to use PSA calls for an application on STM32MP2 platform.
I've seen the psa_call() API that I could use, in
drivers/arm/rse/rse_comms.c.
The problem is that it is based on MHU mailbox, which I don't have on
STM32MP2.
So I was planning plan to disentangle RSE comms and MHU, having a new
file in the same directory to manage MHU.
This code should then be under a flag, I could re-use PLAT_MHU_VERSION.
Setting it to 0, would mean no MHU.
AFAICT TF-M uses that split with a dedicated file:
rse_comms_hal.c: Abstracts MHU message sending and receiving.
(see
https://tf-m-user-guide.trustedfirmware.org/platform/arm/rse/rse_comms.html).
Do you think this approach sounds right?
Thanks,
Yann