Hello,
The first IPC implementation works under isolation level 1. The high isolation levels need to be there to get compatible with PSA Firmware Framework. A design document is created about implementing isolation level 2 for IPC model:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_m/design/trusted_firmware-m_isol…
The mainly change of isolation level 2 compare to isolation level 1 is:
* Put AppRoT Secure Partitions' components with same attribute (code, read-only data, read-write data) into the same region, which helps MPU setting region attributes.
* Change Secure Partition privileged setting based on Secure Partition type while scheduling.
* Change mechanism of privileged API, such as printf.
If you have any comments please share it. You can reply in mailing list if there is no place for putting comments on the page.
Thank you!
-Ken
Hi Andrej,
For you question, please see my comments:
If I understand well, the Crypto, SST and Attestation services do not use IPC, so far. Right?
- Yes.
Should the SST/Crypto/Attestation services be disabled when IPC is enabled?
- No, we do not have to disable them.
May the Library and IPC APIs be used simultaneously?
- Yes. When using " ConfigCoreIPC.cmake" configure file with enabling the " REGRESSION", you can see all the regression test can work.
What part of TFM is using IPC?
- There are two IPC test partitions to use the IPC: trusted-firmware-m/test/test_services/tfm_ipc_client and trusted-firmware-m/test/test_services/tfm_ipc_service. They are used to do basic IPC function tests.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 3:36 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
If I understand well, the Crypto, SST and Attestation services do not use IPC, so far. Right?
Should the SST/Crypto/Attestation services be disabled when IPC is enabled?
May the Library and IPC APIs be used simultaneously?
What part of TFM is using IPC?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 8:22 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
We tested the IPC works on Musca A but not try it on Musca B yet.
The current IPC related patches are used to enable IPC mechanism, but services such as crypto, protect storage and attestation are yet to make use of IPC.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 6:06 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
OK. So, according to https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr… the armclang IPC was added only to one platform (target/mps2/an521/armclang/mps2_an521_s.sct).
What about Musca A and Musca B?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:52 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You can see the log history of master branch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust…p;reserved=0.
All the IPC patches had been existed in master branch.
You can use the master branch now, all the IPC functions had been ready for GCC and ARMCLANG.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:43 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust… master head the latest commit is still 4-day old (4 days Core: Retrieve extra parameter from correct positionHEADmaster Summer Qin).
Should I wait some time till it will be propagated to the public git?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:26 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You are welcome.
Now, the "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into the master branch with the merge patch mentioned below. So all the patches in "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into master too. You can find the related IPC patch in the log history of master branch.
The IPC can works rightly in GCC and ARMCLANG on master branch.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:10 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Thanks Adison,
Yes, we are using the master branch.
When are you planning to merge the mentioned fix to the mainline?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:00 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
I think you mention the "Merge remote-tracking branch 'feature-ipc' into 'master" patch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0.
This is a merge patch to fix the merge conflicts. The original patch to support to change the linker file is here: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0. You can see both the linker files for GCC and ARMCLANG are changed.
IPC had been developed and tested on both the GCC and ARMLANG already.
Thanks for your question.
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 3:35 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hello,
I have noticed, that with adding the IPC feature to master branch, it were updated GCC linker files (#ifdef TFM_PSA_API sections), but ARMCLANG linker files are without any change.
Does it mean that IPC was developed and tested only using GCC? Is there a plan to updated the armclang linker files?
Thanks,
Andrej Butok
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
Hi Edison,
If I understand well, the Crypto, SST and Attestation services do not use IPC, so far. Right?
Should the SST/Crypto/Attestation services be disabled when IPC is enabled?
May the Library and IPC APIs be used simultaneously?
What part of TFM is using IPC?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 8:22 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
We tested the IPC works on Musca A but not try it on Musca B yet.
The current IPC related patches are used to enable IPC mechanism, but services such as crypto, protect storage and attestation are yet to make use of IPC.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 6:06 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
OK. So, according to https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr… the armclang IPC was added only to one platform (target/mps2/an521/armclang/mps2_an521_s.sct).
What about Musca A and Musca B?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:52 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You can see the log history of master branch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust…p;reserved=0.
All the IPC patches had been existed in master branch.
You can use the master branch now, all the IPC functions had been ready for GCC and ARMCLANG.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:43 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust… master head the latest commit is still 4-day old (4 days Core: Retrieve extra parameter from correct positionHEADmaster Summer Qin).
Should I wait some time till it will be propagated to the public git?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:26 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You are welcome.
Now, the "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into the master branch with the merge patch mentioned below. So all the patches in "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into master too. You can find the related IPC patch in the log history of master branch.
The IPC can works rightly in GCC and ARMCLANG on master branch.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:10 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Thanks Adison,
Yes, we are using the master branch.
When are you planning to merge the mentioned fix to the mainline?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:00 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
I think you mention the "Merge remote-tracking branch 'feature-ipc' into 'master" patch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0.
This is a merge patch to fix the merge conflicts. The original patch to support to change the linker file is here: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0. You can see both the linker files for GCC and ARMCLANG are changed.
IPC had been developed and tested on both the GCC and ARMLANG already.
Thanks for your question.
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 3:35 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hello,
I have noticed, that with adding the IPC feature to master branch, it were updated GCC linker files (#ifdef TFM_PSA_API sections), but ARMCLANG linker files are without any change.
Does it mean that IPC was developed and tested only using GCC? Is there a plan to updated the armclang linker files?
Thanks,
Andrej Butok
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
Hi,
The patch for applying Jinja2 to generate custom code has been merged into branch 'master'.
With these two patches, scatter loader template are also supported.
IMPORTANT: Please install Jinja2 before using this feature.
You can check ' docs/user_guides/tfm_sw_requirement.md' for installation.
Thanks.
-Ken
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Liu (Arm Technology China)
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 7:09 PM
> To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
> Subject: RE: Replace custom code generating scripts with Jinja2
>
> Hi,
> I saw there is no concern raised about applying Jinja2 into TF-M project, and
> some code review is done on these patches.
> Plan to merge it at end of Mar 19th, if you have something please just shout 😉
>
> https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/507/
> https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/509/
>
> Thanks
>
> -Ken
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Ken
> > Liu (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 2:18 PM
> > To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> > Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Tf-m] Replace custom code generating scripts with Jinja2
> >
> > Hi Mate,
> > I have checked your change and the document, it looks quite easy to
> > support conditional including.
> > I am OK for this tool.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -Ken
> >
> > From: Ken Liu (Arm Technology China) <Ken.Liu(a)arm.com>
> > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 9:35 PM
> > To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> > Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
> > Subject: Re: Replace custom code generating scripts with Jinja2
> >
> >
> > Hi Mate,
> >
> > Thanks for the proposal. It looks nice.
> >
> > I have read the "Improvements over the current solution" part and I
> > think the "More advanced functionality" is the point I am interested
> > in. There are some necessary jobs to be done in the code generating
> > scripts for IPC; hope using this tool could help on that. One thing we are
> investigating is:
> >
> > * We need to put PSA RoT and APP RoT into different groups in linker script;
> > current tool just put all partitions together and ignores partition type.
> >
> >
> >
> > Can you help to check if the new tool could make this change easier?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> > -Ken
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-
> > bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of Mate Toth-Pal via
> > TF-M <tf-
> > m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
> > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 8:37:58 PM
> > To:
> > tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> > Cc: nd
> > Subject: [Tf-m] Replace custom code generating scripts with Jinja2
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Based on the design proposal published here:
> > https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_m/design/code_generation_wi
> > th_j inja2/ I am planning to replace the code generation tool
> > currently used in the TF- M with the Jinja2 template engine.
> >
> > I already prepared the change that implements this. It is available
> > for review and testing in this gerrit review:
> > https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-
> > firmware-m/+/507/
> >
> > Please note, that this introduces a new tool dependency: jinja2 v2.10
> > python library have to be installed to generate code from the
> > partition manifests. Earlier than 2.10 versions won't work, as one of
> > the templates relies on the namespace feature introduced in this version.
> >
> > Based on this change I also would like to make the secure sct files
> > automatically generated (just like the secure ld files). The gerrit review for this
> change is here:
> > https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/509/
> >
> > Should you have any questions, suggestions, objections, please do not
> > hesitate to contact!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mate
> > --
> > TF-M mailing list
> > TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:TF-M@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
> > --
> > TF-M mailing list
> > TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
Hi Andrej,
We tested the IPC works on Musca A but not try it on Musca B yet.
The current IPC related patches are used to enable IPC mechanism, but services such as crypto, protect storage and attestation are yet to make use of IPC.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 6:06 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
OK. So, according to https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/463/ the armclang IPC was added only to one platform (target/mps2/an521/armclang/mps2_an521_s.sct).
What about Musca A and Musca B?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:52 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You can see the log history of master branch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust…p;reserved=0.
All the IPC patches had been existed in master branch.
You can use the master branch now, all the IPC functions had been ready for GCC and ARMCLANG.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:43 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust… master head the latest commit is still 4-day old (4 days Core: Retrieve extra parameter from correct positionHEADmaster Summer Qin).
Should I wait some time till it will be propagated to the public git?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:26 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You are welcome.
Now, the "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into the master branch with the merge patch mentioned below. So all the patches in "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into master too. You can find the related IPC patch in the log history of master branch.
The IPC can works rightly in GCC and ARMCLANG on master branch.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:10 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Thanks Adison,
Yes, we are using the master branch.
When are you planning to merge the mentioned fix to the mainline?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:00 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
I think you mention the "Merge remote-tracking branch 'feature-ipc' into 'master" patch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0.
This is a merge patch to fix the merge conflicts. The original patch to support to change the linker file is here: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0. You can see both the linker files for GCC and ARMCLANG are changed.
IPC had been developed and tested on both the GCC and ARMLANG already.
Thanks for your question.
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 3:35 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hello,
I have noticed, that with adding the IPC feature to master branch, it were updated GCC linker files (#ifdef TFM_PSA_API sections), but ARMCLANG linker files are without any change.
Does it mean that IPC was developed and tested only using GCC? Is there a plan to updated the armclang linker files?
Thanks,
Andrej Butok
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
Hi,
I saw there is no concern raised about applying Jinja2 into TF-M project, and some code review is done on these patches.
Plan to merge it at end of Mar 19th, if you have something please just shout 😉
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/507/https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/509/
Thanks
-Ken
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Ken Liu
> (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 2:18 PM
> To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [Tf-m] Replace custom code generating scripts with Jinja2
>
> Hi Mate,
> I have checked your change and the document, it looks quite easy to support
> conditional including.
> I am OK for this tool.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Ken
>
> From: Ken Liu (Arm Technology China) <Ken.Liu(a)arm.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 9:35 PM
> To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
> Subject: Re: Replace custom code generating scripts with Jinja2
>
>
> Hi Mate,
>
> Thanks for the proposal. It looks nice.
>
> I have read the "Improvements over the current solution" part and I think the
> "More advanced functionality" is the point I am interested in. There are some
> necessary jobs to be done in the code generating scripts for IPC; hope using this
> tool could help on that. One thing we are investigating is:
>
> * We need to put PSA RoT and APP RoT into different groups in linker script;
> current tool just put all partitions together and ignores partition type.
>
>
>
> Can you help to check if the new tool could make this change easier?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> -Ken
>
> ________________________________
> From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-
> bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>> on behalf of Mate Toth-Pal via TF-M <tf-
> m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 8:37:58 PM
> To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> Cc: nd
> Subject: [Tf-m] Replace custom code generating scripts with Jinja2
>
> Hi All,
>
> Based on the design proposal published here:
> https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_m/design/code_generation_with_j
> inja2/ I am planning to replace the code generation tool currently used in the TF-
> M with the Jinja2 template engine.
>
> I already prepared the change that implements this. It is available for review and
> testing in this gerrit review: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-
> firmware-m/+/507/
>
> Please note, that this introduces a new tool dependency: jinja2 v2.10 python
> library have to be installed to generate code from the partition manifests. Earlier
> than 2.10 versions won't work, as one of the templates relies on the namespace
> feature introduced in this version.
>
> Based on this change I also would like to make the secure sct files automatically
> generated (just like the secure ld files). The gerrit review for this change is here:
> https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/509/
>
> Should you have any questions, suggestions, objections, please do not hesitate
> to contact!
>
> Thanks,
> Mate
> --
> TF-M mailing list
> TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:TF-M@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
> --
> TF-M mailing list
> TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
Hi Edison,
OK. So, according to https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/463/ the armclang IPC was added only to one platform (target/mps2/an521/armclang/mps2_an521_s.sct).
What about Musca A and Musca B?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:52 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You can see the log history of master branch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust…p;reserved=0.
All the IPC patches had been existed in master branch.
You can use the master branch now, all the IPC functions had been ready for GCC and ARMCLANG.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:43 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Edison,
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.trust… master head the latest commit is still 4-day old (4 days Core: Retrieve extra parameter from correct positionHEADmaster Summer Qin).
Should I wait some time till it will be propagated to the public git?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:26 AM
To: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
You are welcome.
Now, the "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into the master branch with the merge patch mentioned below. So all the patches in "feature-ipc" branch had been merge into master too. You can find the related IPC patch in the log history of master branch.
The IPC can works rightly in GCC and ARMCLANG on master branch.
Thanks,
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 4:10 PM
To: Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) <Edison.Ai(a)arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: RE: IPC and clang
Thanks Adison,
Yes, we are using the master branch.
When are you planning to merge the mentioned fix to the mainline?
Thanks,
Andrej
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Edison Ai (Arm Technology China) via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:00 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hi Andrej,
I think you mention the "Merge remote-tracking branch 'feature-ipc' into 'master" patch: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0.
This is a merge patch to fix the merge conflicts. The original patch to support to change the linker file is here: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…p;reserved=0. You can see both the linker files for GCC and ARMCLANG are changed.
IPC had been developed and tested on both the GCC and ARMLANG already.
Thanks for your question.
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 3:35 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hello,
I have noticed, that with adding the IPC feature to master branch, it were updated GCC linker files (#ifdef TFM_PSA_API sections), but ARMCLANG linker files are without any change.
Does it mean that IPC was developed and tested only using GCC? Is there a plan to updated the armclang linker files?
Thanks,
Andrej Butok
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.tru…
Hi Andrej,
I think you mention the "Merge remote-tracking branch 'feature-ipc' into 'master" patch: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/677/-1..2.
This is a merge patch to fix the merge conflicts. The original patch to support to change the linker file is here: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/#/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/463/. You can see both the linker files for GCC and ARMCLANG are changed.
IPC had been developed and tested on both the GCC and ARMLANG already.
Thanks for your question.
Edison
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrej Butok via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 3:35 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] IPC and clang
Hello,
I have noticed, that with adding the IPC feature to master branch, it were updated GCC linker files (#ifdef TFM_PSA_API sections), but ARMCLANG linker files are without any change.
Does it mean that IPC was developed and tested only using GCC? Is there a plan to updated the armclang linker files?
Thanks,
Andrej Butok
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m