- TF-M - lists.trustedfirmware.org

Failure mode of protected storage with faulty NV counters?

by Jeremy Herbert

Hi, I am not too familiar with TF-M, so please forgive me if this is a silly question. The protected storage APIs appear to require the use of on-die flash to store a non-volatile counter that is used for rollback protection. This is severely limiting in terms of the number of writes, because basically you get as many writes as the endurance of the flash on the MCU (for example, the nordic cortex M33 devices have a rated write endurance of 10k cycles per page, and I don't think there is any wear levelling in TF-M). For example, assuming that a device was configured to write to the protected storage on boot, one could pretty easily exhaust this flash in a few hours by continuously power cycling it. Even if the 10k writes is a very conservative rating, it seems pretty likely that the counter flash will fail before UINT32_MAX. My question is: what happens to the security and functionality of the protected storage if the internal NV flash write fails silently? I don't know much about the semiconductor physics at play here, but presumably it could fail to make the counter a constant number, or fail to a random number. I had a quick look but there don't appear to be any checks in the code to ensure that a value was actually written correctly to the NV counters flash in case of silent corruption - it seems to just assume that any error would be detectable by some return code from the flash write driver. I was looking for some check like: if (value_to_write != value_read_back) return FLASH_WORN_OUT_ERROR; But I wasn't able to find it. So assuming it isn't actually there, if the counter fails to a constant (which is not UINT32_MAX) then presumably the rollback protection would be broken for all writes after that point (and maybe some before depending on the constant). If it fails to a random number, then it would be broken in a more "random" way - ie it would randomly work/not work depending on the value of the counter, until all UINT32_MAX numbers are randomly selected as the counter value. Also, given that typical AEAD ciphers like AES-GCM typically fail catastrophically with nonce reuse and the protected storage is indeed AEAD (though I can't quite work out yet which cipher is used), if these non-volatile counters are used to generate a nonce then potentially the encryption of the device could be broken just by rebooting the device until the flash is worn out, and then the nonce will be reused if the flash fails to a constant value. Could someone please help me clear up if my understanding here is correct? As is, I am struggling a bit to understand how to use the protected storage API in a secure way with this constraint, because if an attacker has any way to repeatedly cause a flash write it is basically game over. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jeremy

3 years, 5 months

4
15
0 0

Re: [TF-M] Supporting encryption with ITS

by Sherry Zhang

Hi George, The ITS without encryption is not a compromised RoT. In the PSA Secure Storage API spec, the PSA Internal Trust Storage aims at providing a place for devices to store their most intimate secrets. Also “””””””””””””””””””” 1. The storage underlying the PSA Internal Trusted Storage Service MUST be protected from read and modification by attackers with physical access to the device. 2. The storage underlying the PSA Internal Trusted Storage Service MUST be protected from direct read or write access from software partitions outside of the PSA Root of Trust (PRoT). “””””””””””””””””””” So, for internal trusted storage service, it requires the underlying storage itself should provide being read or write protection. The storage area should be a “trusted” area. Does the storage area on your device meet this requirement? Is the memory physically isolated? If not, I wonder why not uses the Protected Storage service instead? For the design of adding encryption in ITS, in the PS partition, the `iv` and the encrypted object data are stored with the object file while the tag of each object is stored with the object table file. So, if encrypt the PS object in the ITS file system, how the PS partition get the `tag` of each object? After a rough thought, I think probably a standalone encryption for ITS is more reasonable. As this is a relatively “big topic”, would you like to hold a discussion on the TF-M Tech forum if it is not limited by confidential information? The next Tech forum will be hold on this Thursday 3:00 PM UTC time. Regards, Sherry Zhang From: Vasilakis, Georgios <georgios.vasilakis(a)nordicsemi.no<mailto:georgios.vasilakis@nordicsemi.no>> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 8:52 PM To: Sherry Zhang <Sherry.Zhang2(a)arm.com<mailto:Sherry.Zhang2@arm.com>>; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com<mailto:nd@arm.com>> Subject: Re: [TF-M] Supporting encryption with ITS Hello Sherry, Thank you for your input! 1. Our threat model is more concerned about attacks which can happen very early in the boot process, I think. A completely compromised RoT is not in our threat model. 2. I see that, ITS is supposed to store small objects. The storage overhead of adding encryption will be probably bigger than 20 bytes I think but the intention is to have this only as a configuration, not as the default option. 3. Agreed, a HAL API should be used for this. Do you have any opinion on the design of it? Do you think that it adds value to do try to use a common design for the object handling of both PS and ITS or is it better to have it as a standalone thing for the ITS. Regards, George ________________________________ From: Sherry Zhang <Sherry.Zhang2(a)arm.com<mailto:Sherry.Zhang2@arm.com>> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 11:58 AM To: Vasilakis, Georgios <georgios.vasilakis(a)nordicsemi.no<mailto:georgios.vasilakis@nordicsemi.no>>; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com<mailto:nd@arm.com>> Subject: RE: [TF-M] Supporting encryption with ITS Hi George, Some comments from my side: 1. Internal trusted storage is part of the Root of Trust domain. If ITS storage device is attacked, then the code flash where the PSA Rot SP locates may also be attacked. Does the thread model of your system require the encryption in ITS? 2. The ITS service is intended to be used to interface to a small piece of storage. Encryption would increase the context for each ITS file. For example, similarly to PS object context, the `IV` which is used in encryption as well as the generated `tag` should be added into each file context. They total together can be about more than 20 bytes. 3. If the encryption is mandatory/ necessary required by the thread model of your system, as discussed, the PSA crypto service should not be called to avoid the circular. I think a HAL API for encryption may be created in ITS for platform implementation defined encryption/decryption. Regards, Sherry Zhang From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Vasilakis, Georgios via TF-M Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:47 PM To: Gyorgy Szing <Gyorgy.Szing(a)arm.com<mailto:Gyorgy.Szing@arm.com>>; Fabian Schmidt <fabian.schmidt(a)nxp.com<mailto:fabian.schmidt@nxp.com>> Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com<mailto:nd@arm.com>>; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> Subject: Re: [TF-M] Supporting encryption with ITS Hey Gyorgy, These are very valuable comments! I am aware of the circular dependency issue because the PSA apis are using the ITS as a storage backend. This, as you said, can be circumvented by using a software crypto library or an implementation specific API. So, for the encryption a flexible API can be used which can allow externals to use their own function calls. Regarding the key storage, this is what I had in mind as well, using derived keys from the HUK. So that we don't need to store anything but the crypto metadata. Adding another layer of storage will raise more issues, I think. ________________________________ From: Gyorgy Szing <Gyorgy.Szing(a)arm.com<mailto:Gyorgy.Szing@arm.com>> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 4:30 PM To: Fabian Schmidt <fabian.schmidt(a)nxp.com<mailto:fabian.schmidt@nxp.com>>; Vasilakis, Georgios <georgios.vasilakis(a)nordicsemi.no<mailto:georgios.vasilakis@nordicsemi.no>> Cc: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>; nd <nd(a)arm.com<mailto:nd@arm.com>> Subject: RE: [TF-M] Supporting encryption with ITS Hi, AFAIK the main reason for ITS not using encryption is the problem of circular dependency. ITS is used by crypto SP for key storage, so how will crypto fetch the key from ITS to decrypt ITS? You could use a software crypto implementation (another mbed-tls instance) in ITS, but where would you safely store the keys? If you have a two layer ITS, one for only storing the keys for the second instance, and a second, encrypted one, then you end up with something like ITS and PS. You may not need a full blown on-chip FLASH device for ITS. If you have a HUK available, you can derive the same SP specific keys from that at each boot, and store these in RAM backed ITS. You won’t be able to store other keys in ITS in a persistent way of course, but for that you can use PS. Well, something along these lines. Perhaps the TF-M team could help better if you could share some details on why your customer would need encrypted ITS. (A PSA for Cortex-A (TS) maintainer chiming in to a “not his business” discussion here 😉 ) /George From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Fabian Schmidt via TF-M Sent: September 23, 2021 15:51 To: Vasilakis, Georgios <georgios.vasilakis(a)nordicsemi.no<mailto:georgios.vasilakis@nordicsemi.no>> Cc: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> Subject: Re: [TF-M] Supporting encryption with ITS Hi George, I’m wondering if that would add value. To my understanding, ITS was never designed to be encrypted because of the way it’s supposed to be set up. (It’s Internal Trusted Storage.) I believe best practice is to place it in a “trusted” location, one that is ideally only accessible from Secure world, and also ideally on-die. If you then restrict outside access to the internal flash (JTAG, flash programmer ports,…), you’re pretty golden, in that no unauthorized party should be able to read from or write to the ITS.* Let me know if I misunderstand anything about ITS or TrustZone, but that’s my view. Maybe I’m painting an idealized picture. Greetings, Fabian Schmidt * at least short of a sophisticated physical attack or finding some loophole in TrustZone… From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Vasilakis, Georgios via TF-M Sent: Donnerstag, 23. September 2021 15:28 To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> Subject: [EXT] [TF-M] Supporting encryption with ITS Caution: EXT Email Hey all, Lately the requirement for an encrypted ITS solution is being asked from our customers and I would like to have a discussion here on how we can design this in a reasonable way. The first thought that came to my mind was to add the functionality to the ITS flash-fs layer. This layer contains file metadata in the its_file_meta_t structure and it should be possible to expand this to include additional crypto metadata (conditionally). This seems to be the less invasive change to me, even though it will introduce some increased memory usage since supporting encryption will mean that we cannot read the data in chunks anymore, we will have to use static buffers. At the same time, I looked at the PS partition since I knew that it has support for encryption. I believe that some core concepts of both solutions have similarities even though the code is quite different. For example, a file in ITS is similar to an object in PS and the (linear) list of file metadata in ITS is similar to the concept of the object table in PS. So, I think that it should be possible to design some generic-enough APIs that we can use for both the ITS and PS. Even though this will require some major refactoring in both partitions, it will decrease the code of these services which will probably decrease maintenance later. What are your thoughts on this? Regards, George

3 years, 6 months

6
16
0 0

Re: Status of RSS platform?

by Maulik Patel

Hi Chris, RSS build requires new runtime Measured Boot Service. This service partition is not yet part of PSA specification and hence it resides in the tf-m-extras repository. (https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/tf-m-extras.git/) For out of tree partition build, if you map the tf-m-extras repo and provideTFM_EXTRA_MANIFEST_LIST_FILES =<path_to_measured_boot_manifest_list.yaml> and TFM_EXTRA_PARTITION_PATHS=<path_to_measured_boot_partition> (example as below), then it should fix build issue. -DTFM_EXTRA_MANIFEST_LIST_FILES=../../tf-m-extras/partitions/measured_boot/measured_boot_manifest_list.yaml -DTFM_EXTRA_PARTITION_PATHS=../../tf-m-extras/partitions/measured_boot If the error persists, could you please send me the build options you are using and I'll look into this further. Best Regards, Maulik ________________________________ From: tf-m-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2022 1:00 AM To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Subject: TF-M Digest, Vol 47, Issue 7 Send TF-M mailing list submissions to tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to tf-m-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org You can reach the person managing the list at tf-m-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of TF-M digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Status of RSS platform? (Chris.Brand(a)infineon.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 21:48:05 +0000 From: <Chris.Brand(a)infineon.com> Subject: [TF-M] Status of RSS platform? To: <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Message-ID: <2441d128df93483abc1da39c38e89885(a)infineon.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2441d128df93483abc1da39c38e89885infineoncom_" Hi, I'm wondering what the status of the RSS platform is. I tried to build it from the current HEAD of master and also from a few earlier commits, and cannot get it to build (I get an error about TFM_MEASURED_BOOT_SID being undeclared in some of the generated code). I was curious about the implementation of tfm_hal_get_mem_security_attr(), tfm_hal_get_secure_access_attr() and tfm_hal_get_ns_access_attr() on an ARMv8 multi-core platform, but there doesn't currently seem to be an implementation of those HAL functions. Thanks, Chris Brand Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. An Infineon Technologies Company Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand(a)infineon.com<mailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com> International Place 13700 V6V 2X8 Richmond Canada www.infineon.com<www.cypress.com<http://www.cypress.com>> www.cypress.com<http://www.cypress.com> Discoveries<http://www.infineon.com/discoveries> Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/infineon> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/Infineon> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/infineon-technologies> Part of your life. Part of tomorrow. NOTICE: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material of Infineon Technologies AG and its affiliated entities which is for the exclusive use of the individual designated above as the recipient. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact immediately the sender by returning e-mail and delete the material from any computer. If you are not the specified recipient, you are hereby notified that all disclosure, reproduction, distribution or action taken on the basis of this message is prohibited.

3 years, 6 months

3
3
0 0

TF-M configurability

by Anton Komlev

Hello, Recently we discussed the movement of relevant options into C header files as a potential configuration improvement. By this mail thread, I would like to provoke discussion on what else we are lacking in TF-M configurability and thoughts to make it better. Please share your ideas to review them in the upcoming tech forum. Thanks, Anton

3 years, 6 months

2
2
0 0

Status of RSS platform?

by Chris.Brand＠infineon.com

Hi, I'm wondering what the status of the RSS platform is. I tried to build it from the current HEAD of master and also from a few earlier commits, and cannot get it to build (I get an error about TFM_MEASURED_BOOT_SID being undeclared in some of the generated code). I was curious about the implementation of tfm_hal_get_mem_security_attr(), tfm_hal_get_secure_access_attr() and tfm_hal_get_ns_access_attr() on an ARMv8 multi-core platform, but there doesn't currently seem to be an implementation of those HAL functions. Thanks, Chris Brand Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. An Infineon Technologies Company Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand(a)infineon.com<mailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com> International Place 13700 V6V 2X8 Richmond Canada www.infineon.com<www.cypress.com> www.cypress.com<http://www.cypress.com> Discoveries<http://www.infineon.com/discoveries> Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/infineon> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/Infineon> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/infineon-technologies> Part of your life. Part of tomorrow. NOTICE: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material of Infineon Technologies AG and its affiliated entities which is for the exclusive use of the individual designated above as the recipient. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact immediately the sender by returning e-mail and delete the material from any computer. If you are not the specified recipient, you are hereby notified that all disclosure, reproduction, distribution or action taken on the basis of this message is prohibited.

3 years, 6 months

2
1
0 0

Reproducible test builds

by Bøe, Sebastian

Hello, when building TF-M you get the same result no matter what computer you build from assuming all the tooling is the same version. The builds are reproducible in other words. But when building TF-M together with the tests, e.g. by building the regression test suite you will get a different binary depending on where in the filesystem the tf-m-tests repository has been installed. This is because the TEST_FAIL macro uses the gcc macro _FILE_ which injects the absolute paths of source files into strings in the binary. This is a big problem for people using CI systems as a different sized binary can affect race conditions, flash region usage overflows, etc.. I think we should make builds reproducible by default, possibly with a configuration for adding absolute paths into the binary for those that prefer so. I would like to write a patch to this affect, but would prefer to get some feedback now so I don't have to re-write it in review. The simplest solution is to remove __FILE__ from the TEST_FAIL macro,but this would remove useful information and may also fail in the future if someone else uses __FILE__. The more common way of solving this problem is to add a flag to the compiler that instructs it to replace any occurrences of the absolute path with something else during macro expansion. For instance replace "C:/repos/tf-m-tests/source_file.c" with "TFM_TESTS/source_file.c". For gcc the flag is -fmacro-prefix-map=<old_string>=<new_string>. I don't know what the flag is for the other supported compilers or if they support it at all. Would it be OK to only support reproducible builds for the compilers that support an equivalent of macro-prefix-map?

3 years, 6 months

2
4
0 0

What do you think using configuration headers in TF-M ?

by Anton Komlev

Hello, TF-M has many options to configure. All of them are declared as a CMake variables and many of them translated to compiler definitions later. Since the idea of TF-M configuration via config header file(s) was warmly received on the last tech forum I would like to check with community opinion on such hypothetical move: Configure TF-M via definitions in header files while leave CMake for a building control only. Please share your thoughts, opinions and the possible dependencies. Thanks, Anton

3 years, 6 months

6
9
0 0

[RFC] Fault Injection Hardening (FIH) re-enablement on AN521 are ready for review

by Ken Liu

Hello, The FIH functionality reference implementation on AN521 was there before, and then get turned off last year because it increases the effort of updating the HAL interface. Now the HAL interface update is done, this functionality is re-enabled on AN521, based on the updated HAL. The patches are pushed for your review: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/q/topic:%22FIH_AN521_RE%22+(status:open%… The mechanism is mainly the same as the previous implementation, The document is under modifying to reflect the re-enablement changes but still can be read to recall the general concept: https://tf-m-user-guide.trustedfirmware.org/technical_references/design_doc… Please leave your comments in the patches or do overall discussions in this mail thread. Thanks! /Ken

3 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

AN524 Flash_Driver issue consult

by jidong.mei＠armchina.com

Hi All : I'm developing Flash Driver for TF-M AN524 demo , and trobuled by some code logic . It's that : For , AN524 , PS storage Area is redirect to BRAM , so PS area related read and write can be done using memcpy without Flash driver being implementened . see : platform/ext/target/arm/mps3/an524/cmsis_driver/Driver_Flash.c /* Redirecting PS storage to BRAM */ if (addr >= FLASH_REDIRECT_BASE && addr <= FLASH_REDIRECT_LIMIT) { start_addr = FLASH_REDIRECT_DEST + (addr - FLASH_REDIRECT_BASE); /* PS Flash is emulated over BRAM. use memcpy function. */ memcpy((void *)start_addr, data, cnt); } else { /* Flash driver for QSPI is not ready */ return ARM_DRIVER_ERROR_UNSUPPORTED; } My question is : What the purpose of "else" branch above ? After I implement QSPI driver , in "if" branch , I remove redirect operation , and use Flash Write APIs to replace memcpy func. Then , shoud "else" branch be removed? Or , should I put Flash write driver in "else" branch , and keep "if" branch the same with origion? Best regards, Jidong Mei

3 years, 6 months

2
2
0 0

CMSIS in TF-M

by Chris.Brand＠infineon.com

TF-M includes platform/ext/cmsis, which is CMSIS v5.9.0 with some TF-M-specific changes. Looking at the history for that directory, it seems that we periodically update it and have to re-apply the TF-M-specific changes (which looks to be the naming of the stack and the copy table size). I'm wondering whether there's a plan to either push the TF-M changes into upstream CMSIS or to change TF-M so that they're not needed? It would be nice to just pull CMSIS from upstream like we do with other external libraries... Chris Brand Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. An Infineon Technologies Company Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand(a)infineon.com<mailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com> International Place 13700 V6V 2X8 Richmond Canada www.infineon.com<www.cypress.com> www.cypress.com<http://www.cypress.com> Discoveries<http://www.infineon.com/discoveries> Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/infineon> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/Infineon> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/infineon-technologies> Part of your life. Part of tomorrow. NOTICE: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material of Infineon Technologies AG and its affiliated entities which is for the exclusive use of the individual designated above as the recipient. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact immediately the sender by returning e-mail and delete the material from any computer. If you are not the specified recipient, you are hereby notified that all disclosure, reproduction, distribution or action taken on the basis of this message is prohibited.

3 years, 7 months

2
1
0 0

ITS/PS improvements

by Roman.Mazurak＠infineon.com

Hello all, I made a patch (https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/16214) that reorganize interaction between ITS partition, ITS file system and ITS flash driver. 1. ITS flash driver interface is decoupled from ITS file system. 2. ITS flash driver interface isn't dependent on upper layers like ITS FS or ITS. 3. ITS flash driver emulated in RAM (its_flash_ram) can be used without CMSIS flash driver even in production environment if needed. 4. Target can provide own implementation of ITS flash driver without implementing CMSIS flash driver. Which can be more flexible or simple in some cases. 5. Allocation of ITS flash driver instance by ITS partition is not dependent on lower layers like CMSIS driver. ITS partition uses abstract flash driver interface to bind ITS file system and driver instance. This changes gives following benefits. 1. Vendors can provide ITS flash driver without need to create an intermediate CMSIS flash driver. 2. It's possible to implement ITS encryption by adding a new ITS flash driver that performs encryption and uses existing drivers (NOR, NAND, RAM, platform specific) as the storage backend. 3. It's possible to use ITS file system + ITS encryption driver (b) for Protected Storage directly without additional context switching during access to PS file system handled by ITS partition. I think it should improve performance of PS. 4. Use ITS file system directly in application specific custom partitions by allocating ITS file system context and ITS flash driver. Best regards, Roman.

3 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Service vs Partition wording in manifest files

by Bohdan.Hunko＠infineon.com

Hi everyone, From what I see manifest lists (e.g. tools/tfm_manifest_list.yaml) describe partitions, but "name" field there (which is a description of the partition) uses "Service" word, for example: "name": "Protected Storage Service", Shouldn't this be "name": "Protected Storage Partition" ? Why do TFM uses Service when describing the Partition? Regards, Bohdan Hunko Cypress Semiconductor Ukraine Engineer CSUKR CSS ICW SW FW Mobile: +38099 50 19 714 Bohdan.Hunko(a)infineon.com<mailto:Bohdan.Hunko@infineon.com>

3 years, 7 months

3
12
0 0

TF-M Tech Forum minutes / upcoming Tech Forums calendar

by Don Harbin

Hi All, A gentle reminder that past TF-M Tech Forum minutes/recordings including the last one from August 4th can be found *here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/tf-m-technical-forum/>* . Also, the public calendar that includes upcoming TF-M tech forums can be found *here* <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>. Best regards, Don Harbin TrustedFirmware Community Manager don.harbin(a)linaro.org

3 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Request about local test with IAR compiler

by Jianliang Shen

Hi, I made a patch<https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/16106> to change CMSIS-RTOS RTX library attribute for ARMv8-M Mainline platforms in TF-M, the reference is CMSIS-RTOS2<https://www.keil.com/pack/doc/CMSIS/RTOS2/html/pDirectory_Files.html#libFil…>. As CI doesn't cover IAR compiler, I'm very grateful if someone who is convenient can help me build and run it with IAR toolchain locally. Best Regards Jianliang Shen

3 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Proposal for coding standard update: Increase chars per line 80-> 128.

by Anton Komlev

Hi, TF-M coding standard<https://tf-m-user-guide.trustedfirmware.org/contributing/coding_guide.html> mandates up to 80 characters per line. This looks a bit too restrictive nowadays with no punch cards or text terminals. I propose to increase this limit to 120 or 140 characters. Personally like 128. Are there any thoughts or objections against it? Thanks, Anton

3 years, 7 months

6
7
0 0

Example Partition Updates

by Kevin Peng

Hi all, Please be noted that the TF-M example Secure Partition has been moved from the tf-m-tools repo to the tf-m-extras<https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/tf-m-extras.git/tree/examples/example_…> repo. It has also been aligned with the latest TF-M. The documentations are improved as well. It could be a good reference for Secure Partition developer starters. Best Regards, Kevin

3 years, 7 months

2
2
0 0

Documentation improvements

by Anton Komlev

Hello, The project documentation will never be ideal and we are continuing improving it. Let me ask you for reply to this email with the pain points you have experienced or suggestions for improvements to be considered in this phase. Your direct contribution with docs articles will be much appreciated too. For example: TF-M debugging technics and experience would be very helpful. Thank you in advance, Anton

3 years, 7 months

3
3
0 0

TF-M CI build failures in master

by Andersson, Joakim

It looks like the TF-M CI has build failures in the master branch. The build log for tf-m-build-and-test has a lot of build errors: https://ci.trustedfirmware.org/blue/organizations/jenkins/tf-m-build-and-te… The following message is printed: [2022-08-01T11:14:49.204Z] Exception: Invalid "conditional" attribute: "TEST_NS_CORE" for TFM Core Test Service. Please set to one of ['on', 'true', 'enabled'] or ['off', 'false', 'disabled', ''], case-insensitive. [2022-08-01T11:14:49.204Z] CMake Error at tools/CMakeLists.txt:158 (message): [2022-08-01T11:14:49.204Z] File generation failed The top commit on master looks like a likely candidate for this problem: commit 56979ee5579dbb90bbf598af4c252259e5f20777 (tfm/master) Author: Kevin Peng kevin.peng(a)arm.com<mailto:kevin.peng@arm.com> Date: Thu May 12 12:11:31 2022 +0800 Tools: Pass build configurations through header file This patch adds a new configuration header file argument for the manifest tool. For example, this PR is triggering the issue: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/16110 Joakim Andersson | Senior R&D Engineer Trondheim, Norway nordicsemi.com<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nordic…> | devzone.nordicsemi.com<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdevzone.n…> Facebook<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.faceb…> | LinkedIn<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linke…> | Twitter<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.c…> | YouTube<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtu…> | Instagram<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.insta…> [Nordic_logo_signature]<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nordic…>

3 years, 7 months

3
3
0 0

[RFC]Decoupling manifest tool with build system

by Kevin Peng

[Thread res-used, title renamed] Hi all, This is now happening - fully support non-CMake use of the manifest tool. Here is the patch: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/15756 With this patch, the manifest tool takes build configurations from a config header file instead of replying on the build system. Please check the details in the patch. Any comments are welcome. Best Regards, Kevin -----Original Message----- From: Andrej Butok <andrey.butok(a)nxp.com> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2022 2:49 PM To: Kevin Peng <Kevin.Peng(a)arm.com>; Raef Coles <Raef.Coles(a)arm.com> Cc: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: RE: Any usage of environment variables in manifest lists > If there are strong requirements on supporting the non-cmake usecase Yes, it is 😉 -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Peng via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2022 5:46 AM To: Kevin Peng <Kevin.Peng(a)arm.com>; Raef Coles <Raef.Coles(a)arm.com>; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com> Subject: [TF-M] Re: Any usage of environment variables in manifest lists Well, I think I figured out a way to decouple them. If there are strong requirements on supporting the non-cmake usecase, I can try to work it out. Best Regards, Kevin -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Peng via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2022 10:09 AM To: Raef Coles <Raef.Coles(a)arm.com>; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com> Subject: [TF-M] Re: Any usage of environment variables in manifest lists Yes. The manifest tool is now fully replying on CMake (it has been, since I introduced the conditional parsing of manifests around half a year ago). It needs to be aware of the build configurations. Best Regards, Kevin -----Original Message----- From: Raef Coles <Raef.Coles(a)arm.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 7:15 PM To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; Kevin Peng <Kevin.Peng(a)arm.com> Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com> Subject: Re: Any usage of environment variables in manifest lists Hey Kevin Does this mean that cmake will be required to generate the headers/etc from the manifests? I believe in the past we deliberately supported the non-cmake usecase, as some people were building TF-M in alternate ways. Raef ________________________________________ From: Kevin Peng via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Sent: 11 May 2022 09:24 To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd Subject: [TF-M] Any usage of environment variables in manifest lists Hi, Is there anyone using environment variables for the "manifest" attribute in out-of-tree manifest lists? I'm asking because I'm working to support configurable stack_size for Secure Partitions<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…>. In the patch the support of environment variables in manifest lists is removed<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…>. Because I have to call the CMake command configure_file to replace the stack_size symbols (CMake variables<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freview.tr…> surrounded with "@") with their values. While configure_file does not recognize environment variables. If you do have environment variables in manifest list, there is an alternative: Replace the env. variables with CMake variables surrounded with "@" and set the value of the CMake variables in either config files or command line inputs. Best Regards, Kevin -- TF-M mailing list -- tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org To unsubscribe send an email to tf-m-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org -- TF-M mailing list -- tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org To unsubscribe send an email to tf-m-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org

3 years, 7 months

1
1
0 0

Intended use of psa_reset_key_attributes()

by S Krishnan, Archanaa

Hi, What was the intended usage of psa_reset_key_attribute(*attributes) which requires a PSA call from non-secure side to reset the client attributes? I am curious because the attributes to be reset comes from the non-secure memory, not directly associated with ITS/PS. The current IPC setup performs a PSA call to tfm_crypto_rest_key_attributes()(https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/trust… This function creates a copy of client key attribute in a secure key attribute structure. The secure key attribute is reset (set to 0) and then copied back to the client key attribute before returning to non-secure code. At first glance, this seems like a roundabout way to zeorise client side attributes. Regards, Archanaa

3 years, 7 months

2
3
0 0

FW: [Tf-openci-triage] [Maintenance] - ci.staging.trustedfirmware.org down time 2022-07-22

by Xinyu Zhang

Hi All, FYI. Open CI will be down from 2022 07-22 18:00 UTC to 2022-07-22 22:00 UTC for Jenkins upgrade. Please let us know if there is any problem. Thanks Xinyu -----Original Message----- From: Kelley Spoon via Tf-openci-triage <tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 10:14 PM To: tf-openci(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: [Tf-openci-triage] [Maintenance] - ci.staging.trustedfirmware.org down time 2022-07-22 Hello All, The server will be offline to start a maintenance window on 2022-07-22 at 20:00 UTC. Jenkins will be put into "Shutdown Mode" at 2022-07-22 18:00 UTC to stop accepting new jobs and allow executing tasks to complete. This downtime is required to add a plugin to Jenkins to support new functionality required for a service being developed. The version of Jenkins and the plugins currently being run will not be changing. Emails will be sent prior to and following the upgrade to provide status reports. Start: 2022 07-22 18:00 UTC End: 2022-07-22 22:00 UTC Regards, -- Kelley Spoon <kelley.spoon(a)linaro.org> -- Tf-openci-triage mailing list -- tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org To unsubscribe send an email to tf-openci-triage-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org

3 years, 8 months

1
0
0 0

ns_agent flag

by Chris.Brand＠infineon.com

In https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/archives/list/tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.… Ken mentions the need for a special flag in the manifest to indicate a non-secure agent partition. The code change is fairly easy, I think, but the manifest file format is specified by PSA, and presumably would also need to change. How do we go about doing that? Thanks, Chris Brand Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. An Infineon Technologies Company Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand(a)infineon.com<mailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com> International Place 13700 V6V 2X8 Richmond Canada www.infineon.com<www.cypress.com> www.cypress.com<http://www.cypress.com> Discoveries<http://www.infineon.com/discoveries> Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/infineon> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/Infineon> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/infineon-technologies> Part of your life. Part of tomorrow. NOTICE: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material of Infineon Technologies AG and its affiliated entities which is for the exclusive use of the individual designated above as the recipient. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact immediately the sender by returning e-mail and delete the material from any computer. If you are not the specified recipient, you are hereby notified that all disclosure, reproduction, distribution or action taken on the basis of this message is prohibited.

3 years, 8 months

2
1
0 0

Last call for comments on patch 15362

by Chris.Brand＠infineon.com

Hi, We'd like to merge https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/15362 which makes a small modification to all platform configs (TFM_CONFIG_USE_TRUSTZONE and TFM_MULTI_CORE_TOPOLOGY lose their default values and must be specified for every platform). Chris Brand Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. An Infineon Technologies Company Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand(a)infineon.com<mailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com> International Place 13700 V6V 2X8 Richmond Canada www.infineon.com<www.cypress.com> www.cypress.com<http://www.cypress.com> Discoveries<http://www.infineon.com/discoveries> Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/infineon> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/Infineon> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/infineon-technologies> Part of your life. Part of tomorrow. NOTICE: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material of Infineon Technologies AG and its affiliated entities which is for the exclusive use of the individual designated above as the recipient. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact immediately the sender by returning e-mail and delete the material from any computer. If you are not the specified recipient, you are hereby notified that all disclosure, reproduction, distribution or action taken on the basis of this message is prohibited.

3 years, 8 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion

by Varun Wadekar

Hi Everyone, We presented a proposal at the Tech Forum yesterday to take the LTS idea forward. The recording link and password are provided below. This effort is important for the project, and we don't want to rush into something that is not useful. With holidays and other engagements, we want to provide more time to digest the information and provide feedback. We will schedule another Tech forum discussion in September to hear feedback/concerns/questions. See you soon! -Varun Recording: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/rec/share/wYFz4jQvpLZntYSamyjc5-n_bGNcx_RFm-amEd… Passcode: NUx82^W= From: Joanna Farley <Joanna.Farley(a)arm.com> Sent: Wednesday, 22 June 2022 3:05 PM To: Varun Wadekar <vwadekar(a)nvidia.com>; Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com> Cc: Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: Re: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Hi Everyone, I learnt today that our peer project (TF-M) are having a similar LTS discussion and have their own LTS Tech forum session tomorrow. Its an 8am BST(GMT+1) meeting start but I'm told the LTS discussion is mid agenda so expect the discussion on that to start around 8:30am. I'm told it's an information gathering session rather than a proposal session. Anyway the Zoom id of the call is below. These are recorded like TF-A sessions and will be uploaded to their Techforum page. Joanna This event has been changed with this note: "Extending end date" TF-M Tech forum When Changed: Every 4 weeks from 12am to 1am on Thursday Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix Where https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/92535794925?pwd=TTl0cmo4R2hTNm8wcHo1M3ZKdjlnUT…<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-or…> (map<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googl…>) Calendar anton.komlev(a)arm.com<mailto:anton.komlev@arm.com> Who * Don Harbin - creator * tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> * anton.komlev(a)arm.com<mailto:anton.komlev@arm.com> * leonardo.sandoval(a)linaro.org<mailto:leonardo.sandoval@linaro.org> * abdelmalek.omar1(a)gmail.com<mailto:abdelmalek.omar1@gmail.com> more details ><https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalendar.…> About TF-M Tech forum: This is an open forum for anyone to participate and it is not restricted to Trusted Firmware project members. It will operate under the guidance of the TF TSC. Feel free to forward it to colleagues. Details of previous meetings are here: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/tf-m-technical-forum/<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googl…> ====Zoom==== Topic: TF-M Tech forum - Asia Time Zone Friendly Time: Nov 12, 2020 07:00 AM Greenwich Mean Time Every 4 weeks on Thu, until Mar 4, 2021, 5 occurrence(s) Nov 12, 2020 07:00 AM Dec 10, 2020 07:00 AM Jan 7, 2021 07:00 AM Feb 4, 2021 07:00 AM Mar 4, 2021 07:00 AM Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system. Weekly: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJYodOyvpz8jGNEc_1ykVap8Zg6oTLqZZSeJ/ics…<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googl…> Join Zoom Meeting https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/92535794925?pwd=TTl0cmo4R2hTNm8wcHo1M3ZKdjlnUT…<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googl…> Meeting ID: 925 3579 4925 Passcode: 414410 One tap mobile +12532158782,,92535794925# US (Tacoma) +13462487799,,92535794925# US (Houston) Dial by your location +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose) +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown) +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) 888 788 0099 US Toll-free 877 853 5247 US Toll-free Meeting ID: 925 3579 4925 Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aesS64I7GW<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googl…> Going (anton.komlev(a)arm.com<mailto:anton.komlev@arm.com>)? All events in this series: Yes<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalendar.…> - Maybe<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalendar.…> - No<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalendar.…> more options ><https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalendar.…> Invitation from Google Calendar<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalendar.…> You are receiving this courtesy email at the account anton.komlev(a)arm.com<mailto:anton.komlev@arm.com> because you are an attendee of this event. To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event. Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at https://calendar.google.com/calendar/<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalendar.…> and control your notification settings for your entire calendar. Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn More<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsupport.g…>. From: Joanna Farley <Joanna.Farley(a)arm.com<mailto:Joanna.Farley@arm.com>> Date: Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 18:11 To: Varun Wadekar <vwadekar(a)nvidia.com<mailto:vwadekar@nvidia.com>>, Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com<mailto:okash@google.com>> Cc: Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com<mailto:Matteo.Carlini@arm.com>>, tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion Thanks Varun and Okash. I'll update Jul 14th invite and add LTS as the discussion area. From: Varun Wadekar <vwadekar(a)nvidia.com<mailto:vwadekar@nvidia.com>> Date: Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 17:24 To: Joanna Farley <Joanna.Farley(a)arm.com<mailto:Joanna.Farley@arm.com>>, Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com<mailto:okash@google.com>> Cc: Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com<mailto:Matteo.Carlini@arm.com>>, tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Subject: RE: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion Hi Joanna, Thanks for the update. Okash and I would be ready by July 14. We will prepare the slides for the session. -Varun From: Joanna Farley <Joanna.Farley(a)arm.com<mailto:Joanna.Farley@arm.com>> Sent: Tuesday, 21 June 2022 5:07 PM To: Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com<mailto:okash@google.com>>; Varun Wadekar <vwadekar(a)nvidia.com<mailto:vwadekar@nvidia.com>> Cc: Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com<mailto:Matteo.Carlini@arm.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Okash, Varun, Any thoughts when you want to do a LTS TechForum session. 30th June is now taken and the next scheduled one after that is 14th July. We could try and do a special one on 7th July if that's better. I'm reliant on you guys to jointly prepare and present a LTS TF-A Tech forum session Joanna From: Joanna Farley via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Date: Monday, 6 June 2022 at 13:47 To: Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com<mailto:okash@google.com>> Cc: Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com<mailto:Matteo.Carlini@arm.com>>, tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Subject: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion Hi Okash, The next session after next week is Thursday 30th June at 4pm BST. This is also available with nothing currently scheduled. Joanna From: Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com<mailto:okash@google.com>> Date: Monday, 6 June 2022 at 13:34 To: Joanna Farley <Joanna.Farley(a)arm.com<mailto:Joanna.Farley@arm.com>> Cc: Varun Wadekar <vwadekar(a)nvidia.com<mailto:vwadekar@nvidia.com>>, Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com<mailto:Matteo.Carlini@arm.com>>, tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Subject: Re: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion Hi Joanna and Varun, Sounds good to me. I will be out of country during next week. After that should be fine. Thanks, Okash On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 12:13 PM Joanna Farley <Joanna.Farley(a)arm.com<mailto:Joanna.Farley@arm.com>> wrote: Varun, Okash, I believe the two of you have some interest in the LTS topic. Would the two of you be willing to jointly prepare and present a TF-A Tech forum session? The next available session is Thursday 16th June at 4pm BST. I'm sure there are many definitions of what a LTS release branch is in terms of purpose, content, duration etc. I would expect many platform providers are doing this downstream today and I could imagine there may be variations. Some degree of consensus on how this is managed and resourced would be needed I believe between multiple platform providers who would want to consume this. It would be good to see issues raised for discussion. I'm happy to host if the two of you and any other platform providers interested can prepare a TF-A session to present to the broader TF-A community. Thanks Joanna From: Varun Wadekar via TF-A <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Date: Tuesday, 31 May 2022 at 15:23 To: Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com<mailto:Matteo.Carlini@arm.com>>, Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com<mailto:okash@google.com>>, tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> Subject: [TF-A] Re: Rebooting LTS discussion Hi Matteo/Okash, Thanks for re-starting the discussion. We (NVIDIA) are still interested in the idea and would like to discuss the next steps. I like the idea of a hotfix release, although would propose back-porting fixes to more tags. A targeted tech forum or another mechanism works for me. I would like to discuss the scope of the activity and the engagement model. -Varun -----Original Message----- From: Matteo Carlini <Matteo.Carlini(a)arm.com<mailto:Matteo.Carlini@arm.com>> Sent: Tuesday, 17 May 2022 3:39 PM To: Okash Khawaja <okash(a)google.com<mailto:okash@google.com>>; tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> Cc: Varun Wadekar <vwadekar(a)nvidia.com<mailto:vwadekar@nvidia.com>>; raghu.ncstate(a)icloud.com<mailto:raghu.ncstate@icloud.com> Subject: RE: [TF-A] Rebooting LTS discussion External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Hi Okash, Thanks for rebooting the conversation. Out of the brainstorming from 1.5 yrs ago, we had this page published with an initial RFC proposal for LTSs: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeveloper…<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeveloper…> Worth mentioning that, in the meanwhile, the TF-M project has introduced the concept of Hotfix releases (which is a very lightweight process for backporting critical bug fix/security fixes only to the last available tagged release): https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftf-m-user…<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftf-m-user…> I'm curious to hear others' opinion and interest (@Varun, @Raghu ?) to possibly revive this topic in either in a Tech Forum or at a project TSC/Board level. Thanks Matteo -- TF-A mailing list -- tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org> To unsubscribe send an email to tf-a-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-a-leave@lists.trustedfirmware.org>

3 years, 8 months

2
1
0 0

Partition priority questions

by Bohdan.Hunko＠infineon.com

Hi everyone, TFM manifest files allow to specify priority for the partition. FFM 1.0 and FFM 1.1 specify that there are 3 possible values for this field: Low, NORMAL, HIGH. This field is used in several template files to generate needed for SPM information. From what I see there are several problems with current implementation: 1. In secure_fw/spm/cmsis_func/tfm_spm_db_func.inc.template priority field is used to generate .partition_priority filed of spm_partition_static_data_t structure. It uses TFM_PRIORITY() macro to convert priority to numeric value. The problem is that this field is actually never used, instead all priority checking is done using .flags field of partition_{{manifest.name|lower}}_load_info_t structure (tools/templates/partition_load_info.template file). 2. .flags field uses PARTITION_PRI_ macro to convert priority to numeric value. Possible values for TFM_PRIORITY() are: LOW, NORMAL, HIGH, but PARTITION_PRI_ macro has: LOWES, LOW, NORMAL, HIGH, HIGHEST priorities. More over priorities with same names for these 2 macros have different numeric values (e.g. PARTITION_PRI_LOW is 0x7F while TFM_PRIORITY_LOW is 0xFF) 3. Scatter files does not account for HIGHEST priority (see code here<https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m.git/tree/platform/e…>). This is a problem for all toolchains including both common scatter files (L1 and L2) and scatter files templates for L3 So I have several questions on this topic: 1. Are LOWEST and HIGHEST priorities system reserved? Because for now they cant be used in manifest files as TFM_PRIORITY() does not have support them. 2. Should TFM_PRIORITY() macro and .partition_priority filed of spm_partition_static_data_t structure be removed? This will mean that if LOWEST and HIGHEST priorities are system reserved then validation of value for "priority" manifest field should be added to tfm_parse_manifest_list.py 3. Should scatter files be fixed to account for HIGHEST priority? 4. secure_fw/partitions/ns_agent_tz/load_info_ns_agent_tz.c for NS agent TZ specifies (PARTITION_PRI_LOWEST - 1) for a .flags filed. Higher priority numeric values is lower real priority, which means that TZ NS agent partition priority is between LOW and LOWEST priority. This seems like a hack to me, maybe we should introduce One more named priority? 5. In secure_fw/partitions/CMakeLists.txt idle partition is included when IPC backend is used. Idle partition is used to retrigger scheduling before going into WFI state (just to be sure that higher priority partitions were executed and there is not pending request). I can see how this partition is useful for MULTICORE case, to have kind of sleep state. But for TZ case TZ ns agent is always RUNNABLE and have higher priority that IDLE partition so it does not look like IDLE partition will ever be scheduled in TZ case. In such case condition in this Cmake file should be changed from "if (CONFIG_TFM_SPM_BACKEND_IPC)" to "if (TFM_PARTITION_NS_AGENT_MAILBOX)" Am I wrong somewhere? Sorry, I know that is a lot of questions, but this scheduling stuff is really hard to wrap a head around. Regards, Bohdan Hunko Cypress Semiconductor Ukraine Engineer CSUKR CSS ICW SW FW Mobile: +38099 50 19 714 Bohdan.Hunko(a)infineon.com<mailto:Bohdan.Hunko@infineon.com>

3 years, 8 months

2
2
0 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

TF-M