Hi,
I've posted a design document for bootloader changes to support twin cpu at https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_m/design/twin-cpu/bootloader/
Comments appreciated!
Thanks,
Chris
This message and any attachments may contain confidential information from Cypress or its subsidiaries. If it has been received in error, please advise the sender and immediately delete this message.
Hi,
I will update the wait object from 'event' to 'condition'. This is mainly for fixing the issue:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/T273
'event' is actually a depth 1 semaphore, which is not good enough for signals synching case.
Involve a simpler sync object 'condition' for signals (and client ACKs):
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/712
Please help to check if you are interested in it.
Thanks
-Ken
Hi Alan,
Expected to be merged before end of Mar 13th if there is no more raised concern ;)
-Ken
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of DeMars,
> Alan via TF-M
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2019 11:27 AM
> To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Subject: Re: [TF-M] [EXTERNAL] Branches merging from 'feature-ipc' to 'master'
> is happening
>
> Yay! When?
>
> > On Mar 11, 2019, at 6:57 PM, Ken Liu (Arm Technology China) via TF-M <tf-
> m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi TF-M Subscribers,
> > The branch 'feature-ipc' is going to be merged into 'master', and here is the
> patch:
> > https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/677
> >
> > After the merging, the IPC feature will be available in the 'master' branch,
> future updates on the IPC part will happen in 'master' branch, too.
> > For those patches pushed towards 'feature-ipc' will be reviewed and we
> suggest push new patchset to 'master' branch.
> >
> > Please reply to this thread without hesitation if there are any questions.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -Ken
> > --
> > TF-M mailing list
> > TF-M(a)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
Yay! When?
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 6:57 PM, Ken Liu (Arm Technology China) via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi TF-M Subscribers,
> The branch 'feature-ipc' is going to be merged into 'master', and here is the patch:
> https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/677
>
> After the merging, the IPC feature will be available in the 'master' branch, future updates on the IPC part will happen in 'master' branch, too.
> For those patches pushed towards 'feature-ipc' will be reviewed and we suggest push new patchset to 'master' branch.
>
> Please reply to this thread without hesitation if there are any questions.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Ken
> --
> TF-M mailing list
> TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
Hi TF-M Subscribers,
The branch 'feature-ipc' is going to be merged into 'master', and here is the patch:
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/trusted-firmware-m/+/677
After the merging, the IPC feature will be available in the 'master' branch, future updates on the IPC part will happen in 'master' branch, too.
For those patches pushed towards 'feature-ipc' will be reviewed and we suggest push new patchset to 'master' branch.
Please reply to this thread without hesitation if there are any questions.
Thanks.
-Ken
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 01:43:19PM +0000, Tamas Ban via TF-M wrote:
>https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_m/design/trusted_boot/rollback_p…
Oh, and a little terminology comment about the Trusted non-volatile
(NV) counters. This section should use "increase" and "decrease" not
"increment" and "decrement". There is no requirement that the counter
only be incremented (having 1 added to the value), only that it be set
to a larger value than the current value.
You should probably also add a discussion as to how testing will be
done with a HW security counter.
Again, my suggestion is to not add an additional counter, but just use
the existing version field (minus the build number) as the security
counter value.
David
Hi Alan,
I can answer this from the PSA Firmware Framework specification point of view, Ken (or others in the TF-M team) can clarify how closely the TF-M behaviour matches this.
In the manifest each service has a "signal" attribute which is a C identifier that is given the signal value for that service. The value is allocated by the TF-M tools and should be available to the SP source code via a generated header file - the specification places these definitions in the psa_manifest/<manifestfilename>.h header file, matching the name of the manifest file itself.
When the SP receives a set of signals from psa_wait(), it can identify which signals are asserted using these identifiers to test the signal bits.
The example RoT Service in Appendix D of the PSA Firmware Framework demonstrates this.
Regards,
Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of DeMars, Alan via TF-M
Sent: 08 March 2019 13:52
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] multiple services within the same SP
In a multi-service SP, how does the SP know which SID has been used to connect to it?
--
TF-M mailing list
TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
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 Alan,
Services are listed in SP. SPM could enumerate the services in a SP by the list.
You can check the member variable ' service_list' of ' tfm_spm_ipc_partition_t' to know details.
-Ken
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of DeMars,
> Alan via TF-M
> Sent: Friday, March 8, 2019 9:52 PM
> To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Subject: [TF-M] multiple services within the same SP
>
> In a multi-service SP, how does the SP know which SID has been used to connect
> to it?
> --
> TF-M mailing list
> TF-M(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-m
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.