Hi all,
We will be upgrading Cloudbees CI and clusters hosting review.trustedfirmware.org and ci.trustedfirmware.org on Wednesday, 3rd June 2025 at 16:00 GMT+1.
During this maintenance window, both services will be unavailable for approximately 8 hours.
A follow-up email will be sent once the services are fully restored.
Best regards,
Saheer
[LOGO SMALL]
Saheer Babu
Principal Software Engineer
CESW – Engineering Infrastructure
Hi Nick
First, i share that i'm reviewing TF-M v2.3.0 with tag https://review.trustedfirmware.org/plugins/gitiles/TF-M/trusted-fi…
In the shared commit, platform/ext/target/arm/rse/neoverse_rd/rdv3/bl2/boot_hal_bl2.c call atu_rse_drv_init() in boot_platform_post_init() like below.
int32_t boot_platform_post_init(void)
{
int32_t result;
enum atu_error_t atu_err;
result = rse_sam_init(RSE_SAM_INIT_SETUP_FULL);
if (result != 0) {
return result;
}
atu_err = atu_rse_drv_init(&ATU_DEV_S, ATU_DOMAIN_ROOT, atu_regions_static, atu_stat_count);
if (atu_err != ATU_ERR_NONE) {
return result;
}
But, atu_rse_drv_init don't be called in platform/ext/target/arm/rse/neoverse_rd/rdv3r1/bl2/boot_hal_bl2.c anywhere.
So, i tried to find ATU setting to other sources in RDV3R1 platform, i couldn't find ATU setting to load post image.
Is there any codes setting ATU for each processor region that image will be loaded?
Best Regards
RH Kim
----- 원본 메시지 -----
보낸 사람: Nicola Mazzucato <Nicola.Mazzucato(a)arm.com>
받는 사람: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.xn--org>,-7104au55ev23e <winxp4333(a)adtek.co.kr>
날짜: 2026-05-13 17:01:37
제목: Re: [TF-M] no ATU setting in RDV3r1 with TF-M v2.3.0
Thanks RH Kim,
The commit you shared did not remove any ATU initialisations from what I see.
To understand better, are you working on a branch or old commit where you see atu_rse_drv_init for RDV3R1? If so, can you please share?
I'm also not very familiar with that platform so it's likely I'm missing something, though it seems that the platform_post_init sequence is different from RDV3.
Thanks
Best regards,
Nick
From: 김륜현 via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 13 May 2026 03:16
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-M] no ATU setting in RDV3r1 with TF-M v2.3.0
Dear all, i'm developing the RSE firmware based on rdv3r1.
I'm reviewing TF-M v2.3.0 was recently released for checking difference our project codes.
Among many differences, i discovered missing ATU settings to load post processor images.
In the similar platform rdv3, it calls atu_rse_drv_init() at boot_platform_post_init().
But rdv3r1 doesn't call atu_rse_drv_init() also i can't found ATU settings to load post images in BL2.
Is there any intentions?
Or was it just missing while integrating by this commit https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/…
Please check it
Best Regards
RH Kim
Dear all, i'm developing the RSE firmware based on rdv3r1.
I'm reviewing TF-M v2.3.0 was recently released for checking difference our project codes.
Among many differences, i discovered missing ATU settings to load post processor images.
In the similar platform rdv3, it calls atu_rse_drv_init() at boot_platform_post_init().
But rdv3r1 doesn't call atu_rse_drv_init() also i can't found ATU settings to load post images in BL2.
Is there any intentions?
Or was it just missing while integrating by this commit https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/…
Please check it
Best Regards
RH Kim
Hello,
I am pleased to announce the release of TF-M v2.1.5.
Major highlights:
* SPM: Fixes for FPU context cleanup, add r12 into caller context clearing
* Upgrade to MbedTLS v3.6.6, which contains security advisories.
Please see the release notes<https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/50758/2/docs…> for full details.
Many thanks to Nicola Mazzucato for leading this step, and to everyone who supported this milestone.
Best regards,
Anton
Hello,
We're pleased to announce the release of TF-M v2.3.0.
Major highlights:
* Adoption of TF-PSA-Crypto 1.1.0 in place of Mbed TLS
* Extended support for the Clang/LLVM Arm Toolchain for Embedded (ATfE)
* TF-M Tests: RTX OS is now built from source
This release also includes numerous fixes and improvements - please see the release notes<https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/50322/8/docs…> for full details.
Release v2.1.5 will follow shortly.
Many thanks to everyone who contributed, reviewed, and supported this milestone.
Best regards,
The TF-M Team
Dear all,
I have seen that hw crypto acceleration has been removed from Stm32 platform in v2.3.0.
I was eagerly waiting for this new LTS version however lack of crypto acceleration support for stm32 is a no go for me.
Is there a plan to add crypto acceleration support later ? Or maybe I have missed something ?
Best regards,
Michael Grand
Hi all,
Currently build of psa arch tests fail for CM55 core of our PSE84 platform
File: api-tests/tools/cmake/compiler/{ARMCLANG,GNUARM}.cmake (same in secure-debug/).
Problem: The toolchain file unconditionally adds -march=... derived from CPU_ARCH. When built inside TF-M, mcpu_features.cmake already sets -mcpu=... with extension toggles. The compiler then sees two CPU specs that disagree on extensions.
Why CM33 works, CM55 doesn't:
CM33: -mcpu=cortex-m33 and -march=armv8-m.main describe the same extension set → accepted.
CM55: -mcpu=cortex-m55+nomve+... and -march=armv8.1-m.main disagree on MVE/FP → rejected.
Fix (generic): Skip the -march block when an outer build already selects the CPU (e.g. TFM_SYSTEM_PROCESSOR defined, or CMAKE_C_FLAGS contains -mcpu=/--target=). Long-term: switch psa-arch-tests to -mcpu-based selection.
We have not yet pushed PSE84 psa arch tests target, but maybe this can be check by ARM team using one of ARM CM55 based platforms (e.g. Corstone-300 (MPS3))?
Best regards,
Bohdan Hunko
Cypress Semiconductor Ukraine LLC
Senior Engineer
CSS ICW SW INT BFS SFW
Mobile: +380995019714
Bohdan.Hunko(a)infineon.com<mailto:Bohdan.Hunko@infineon.com>
Hello,
We're preparing two new TF-M releases: v2.3.0 and v2.1.5.
The current plan is to start on April 1st and target April 14th for v2.3.0. Among other improvements and fixes, v2.3.0 will be based on PSA-Crypto v1.1 expected on March 31st .
We'll aim to test both releases in parallel with priority given to v2.3.0, while v2.1.5 will follow.
If there are any changes you'd like included in these releases, please ensure they are reviewed and merged by March 31st.
After successful testing of the v2.3.0 on platforms in OpenCI we plan to allow a one-week window for other platforms to validate and confirm correct operation.
For v2.1.5, we don't expect platform-specific testing, assuming the changes are platform-independent and that CI coverage will be sufficient. However, please feel free to reach out if you have any concerns or anticipate any platform impact.
Thank you and best regards,
Anton
Hello, I am currently developing with the Multi-RSE Topology and have an
inquiry regarding the following
*1. Overview & Environment*
-
*Version:* Trusted Firmware-M (TF-M) 2.2.2
-
*Target Architecture:* MULTI_RSE_TOPOLOGY enabled environment
-
*Related Modules:* boot_hal_bl1_2.c, rse_handshake.c
*2. Background & Code Analysis* We are currently analyzing the BL1 boot
sequence code to set up a Multi-RSE environment. Looking at the
boot_platform_post_init() function in
platform/ext/target/arm/rse/common/bl1/boot_hal_bl1_2.c, the vHUK is
generated in the following sequence:
1.
Calls rse_derive_vhuk_seed()
2.
Checks the CM_POLICIES_VHUK_AGREEMENT_REQUIRED policy, then executes
rse_handshake(vhuk_seed)
3.
Calls rse_setup_vhuk() to derive the final vHUK based on the aggregated
Seed array.
*3. Issue Description* However, upon analyzing the operational structure in
rse_handshake.c, we suspect a synchronization defect exists where the
Server (Primary RSE) and multiple Clients (Secondary RSEs) will end up
generating different final vHUKs.
-
Looking at the rse_handshake_server() logic, the server replies to the
client *immediately* within the receive loop with the *currently*
aggregated vhuk_seeds_buf every time it receives a Seed from a client.
-
Because of this behavior, Client 1 (the first to connect) receives an
incomplete array (e.g., [C0, C1, 0, 0]) that lacks the seeds of
subsequent clients. Only the last client to connect receives the fully
populated array ([C0, C1, C2, C3]).
-
Consequently, each Client executes rse_setup_vhuk() with a different
state of vhuk_seeds_buf. This ultimately leads to mismatched final vHUK
values across the RSEs within the system.
*4. Questions*
1.
Is this behavior (returning an incomplete Seed array based on the client
connection order) an intended operation within the security architecture?
2.
If this is not intended, is this a known bug in TF-M 2.2.2 where the
logic for the Server to broadcast (or perform a 2-Phase synchronization of)
the completed array to all clients *after* gathering all seeds is
missing?
3.
Could you please provide a workaround for this issue, or guide us to a
specific patch/commit if this has been resolved in a newer version?
Thank you in advance for your support.
