Hi Yann,


I realized now, the patch I proposed does not work for you to run the same BL2 image with OP-TEE (BL32) or SP_min (BL32) run.

IMO then better retrieve the TOS_FW_CONFIG info run-time.

Is there any way to differentiate OP-TEE or SP_min run in the ST platform to use it as a run-time check?



Manish Badarkhe

From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Manish Badarkhe via TF-A <tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Tuesday, 7 December 2021 at 18:32
To: Yann Gautier <yann.gautier@foss.st.com>, tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [TF-A] FCONF warning for TOS_FW_CONFIG

Hi Yann,


IMO, platform should not pass ‘TOS_FW_CONFIG_ID’ to this generic function ‘‘dyn_cfg_dtb_info_getter’ while using OPTEE.

It is better not to handle specific scenarios mentioned in your proposed patch in the generic library function, but let me know what do you think?


I would suggest below modifications in the platform code instead:


diff --git a/plat/st/stm32mp1/bl2_plat_setup.c b/plat/st/stm32mp1/bl2_plat_setup.c

index 7eaf0ed98..96e24401e 100644

--- a/plat/st/stm32mp1/bl2_plat_setup.c

+++ b/plat/st/stm32mp1/bl2_plat_setup.c

@@ -357,7 +357,9 @@ int bl2_plat_handle_post_image_load(unsigned int image_id)




+#ifndef AARCH32_SP_OPTEE




#endif /* !STM32MP_USE_STM32IMAGE */



Manish Badarkhe

From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Yann Gautier via TF-A <tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Friday, 3 December 2021 at 10:44
To: tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-A] FCONF warning for TOS_FW_CONFIG


On STM32MP1, we'd like BL2 to be agnostic of what BL32 is in the FIP.
It can be either OP-TEE or TF-A SP_min.

But on STM32MP1, SP_min needs a device tree file (TOS_FW_CONFIG_ID),
whereas OP-TEE doesn't use this separate DT image.

As TOS_FW_CONFIG_ID is in list of images to be loaded by BL2, we then
have a warning message in case OP-TEE is used:
WARNING: FCONF: Invalid config id 26

I'd like to silence this warning with this kind of patch:
diff --git a/lib/fconf/fconf_dyn_cfg_getter.c
index 25dd7f9eda..f7e9834c3b 100644
--- a/lib/fconf/fconf_dyn_cfg_getter.c
+++ b/lib/fconf/fconf_dyn_cfg_getter.c
@@ -51,7 +51,11 @@ struct dyn_cfg_dtb_info_t
*dyn_cfg_dtb_info_getter(unsigned int config_id)

-       WARN("FCONF: Invalid config id %u\n", config_id);
+       if (config_id == TOS_FW_CONFIG_ID) {
+               VERBOSE("FCONF: No TOS_FW_CONFIG image\n");
+       } else {
+               WARN("FCONF: Invalid config id %u\n", config_id);
+       }

         return NULL;

I can change the VERBOSE message to INFO.

Do you think it is OK if I push the patch?

TF-A mailing list