Hi George
The headless mode is functional identical to a command-line mode. I agree that the command line is not self-explaining in the moment, but this can be improved over time.
CMSIS-Zone is a tool that is specifically designed for Cortex-M security and MPU configuration. It is fully supported by Arm and part of our CMSIS open source activities.
CMSIS-Zone
* Supports all Cortex-M23/M33 devices that are on the market public today and extending this support is easy to achieve with an *.rzone file
* The *.rzone approach will be part of our IP configuration activities that is under Socrates.
* The template engine gives you flexibility for generating many different files, source, header, linker scripts etc.
* The tool has both GUI interface and command line mode
* All XML files are fully documented and explained
* It generates static setup which reduces the run-time overhead and the memory footprint. Both is critical for TF-M
* While it requires Eclipse framework, this is not different form other tools (i.e. Phyton requires Phyton framework).
So, I somewhat cannot understand your argument.
Thanks
Reinhard
Hi,
Looking at the big picture, the secure side is owning the memory map, so it seems to be inevitable to communicate this information to the non-secure world. There are many ways to do this, ranging from capturing the info in documentation to providing configuration to high-level memory layout definition tools. The build system could support multiple options, but the first implementation shall focus on portability.
Having a set of header files, which (as the tf-m build system already shows) make the needed information available for both the C program, the linker and the build system, seems to be a good fit to me. It might not be the most user friendly, but is highly accessible.
What those header files actually do contain is a different question. Sor security reasons it may be a good idea to remove all information not needed by the NS world. Luckily CMake has the needed features to solve this issue.
And when we are at the topic, we need to provide a solution for defining available peripherals to as the secure vs non-secure peripheral availability is also controlled by the secure-side.
There seems to be room for a tool independent of tf-m to help standardizing the format this information can be captured in, to help portability of this information and to enhance user-experience. Unfortunately CMSIS-Zone (as per this page https://arm-software.github.io/CMSIS_5/Zone/html/zTInstall.html ) is an IDE extension and thus it is hardly applicable in a command-line focused build environment.
/George
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Robert Rostohar via TF-M
Sent: 03 February 2020 08:15
To: TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Exporting flash_layout.h and region_defs.h
Hi,
I don’t believe this is the right approach.
TF-M currently includes a non-secure side application (integration test) which is built together with the secure side. This is also reflected in “flash_layout.h” and “region_defs.h” which mixes defines for the secure and non-secure side.
While this might be convenient within TF-M current build setup for the platforms that are supported, it causes issues in real applications and when trying to make this scalable across a large number of platforms. We have seen those issues already while working on providing TF-M as a CMSIS-Pack.
There should be a clean separation of files between the secure and non-secure side.
The mentioned header files should not be imposed to the non-secure side.
Typically non-secure software will have a device specific linker script which will only need to know limited information from the memory layout (non-secure code and data location). Also the secure side might be prebuilt and the non-secure side developed and built separately.
One possible solution is to use a CMSIS-Zone to partition the memory layout on a global level and then splitting it to sub-systems for secure and non-secure and exporting only relevant information for each side. This approach will be used also with TF-M CMSIS-Pack which should be available soon.
Best regards,
Robert
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Devaraj Ranganna via TF-M
Sent: Friday 31 January 2020 17:09
To: TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:TF-M@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-M] Exporting flash_layout.h and region_defs.h
Hi,
The headers `flash_layout.h` and `region_defs.h` as the name suggests defines layout of flash and how different regions are organised in flash and ram respectively. These headers define the location of Bootloader if any, secure and non-secure firmware in flash and these defines are used in the linker scripts. As far as I can tell, these headers will be used by NS RTOS without any modifications, I can confirm that, this is the case in Mbed OS.
Since these headers are usually imported into NS RTOS without any modifications, I propose that we export these headers as part of the build.
Thanks,
Dev
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
Hi,
I don’t believe this is the right approach.
TF-M currently includes a non-secure side application (integration test) which is built together with the secure side. This is also reflected in “flash_layout.h” and “region_defs.h” which mixes defines for the secure and non-secure side.
While this might be convenient within TF-M current build setup for the platforms that are supported, it causes issues in real applications and when trying to make this scalable across a large number of platforms. We have seen those issues already while working on providing TF-M as a CMSIS-Pack.
There should be a clean separation of files between the secure and non-secure side.
The mentioned header files should not be imposed to the non-secure side.
Typically non-secure software will have a device specific linker script which will only need to know limited information from the memory layout (non-secure code and data location). Also the secure side might be prebuilt and the non-secure side developed and built separately.
One possible solution is to use a CMSIS-Zone to partition the memory layout on a global level and then splitting it to sub-systems for secure and non-secure and exporting only relevant information for each side. This approach will be used also with TF-M CMSIS-Pack which should be available soon.
Best regards,
Robert
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Devaraj Ranganna via TF-M
Sent: Friday 31 January 2020 17:09
To: TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] Exporting flash_layout.h and region_defs.h
Hi,
The headers `flash_layout.h` and `region_defs.h` as the name suggests defines layout of flash and how different regions are organised in flash and ram respectively. These headers define the location of Bootloader if any, secure and non-secure firmware in flash and these defines are used in the linker scripts. As far as I can tell, these headers will be used by NS RTOS without any modifications, I can confirm that, this is the case in Mbed OS.
Since these headers are usually imported into NS RTOS without any modifications, I propose that we export these headers as part of the build.
Thanks,
Dev
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
Hi,
Why the title is ‘linker issue’ since it is discussing about the printf things?
/Ken
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Devaraj Ranganna via TF-M
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 9:57 PM
To: TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] TF-M NS regression tests - linker issue
Hi,
The TF-M NS regression tests were portable enough to run in a rich OS environment. After replacing printf with tfm_log_printf, the TF-M regression tests are now no longer portable enough to run in an OS environment. Many OSes already have a way to print, usually via a printf function, and the TF-M regression tests probably should use this.
It's important that TF-M regression tests remain portable and capable of running in an OS environment so that system integrators can be confident that TF-M is working as intended post-integration.
I’ve already created a ticket for this https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/T664
Response from Ken in the ticket:
Hi Jamie,
The background for this changing is, the ARMCLANG printf involves \_\_stdout' into the image and this conflicts with some CMSIS functionalities. (CMSIS team reported that __stdout would affect the mutex init in ARMCLANG). That is the reason why I skipped the default printf.
I think for an RTOS, the toolchain provided printf sometimes come with unknown symbols and causes unexpected behaviour, as the discussion in list/channel, most people are trying to avoid toolchain printf and use some lightweight output.
And for the test, it should use wrapped TEST_LOG(), instead of calling printf itself, since some RTOS do not provide a std 'printf' function.
Is there any discussion thread about this issue?
Thanks
Thanks,
Dev
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
