Running regression tests with the current HEAD, the secure tests all pass but the non-secure tests get stuck early on (I suspect that responses don't get back to the NS core). Reverting 5e68b11764673ee32bae0de8ecf3cde45cc55ea1 "SPM: Trigger scheduler at the end of SPM API" fixes the issue. Was that patch tested with multi-core?
I created a patch to revert that patch for now - https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/11998
Chris Brand
Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com
Hi Chris,
Unfortunately, not tested since the logic is a regarded as a common change that if it can run with IPC then dual-core should not be affected - seems something unexpected occurred.
As there are still come upcoming changes on scheduling under reviewing, let's test these new patches on dual-core and create a fix patch.
Is it okay to keep 11998 for local usage, and back to mainline when issue get fixed? As 5e68b11 is the fundamental patch to make SPM work under thread mode.
Thanks.
/Ken
From: TF-M tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org On Behalf Of chris.brand--- via TF-M Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 2:25 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Running regression tests with the current HEAD, the secure tests all pass but the non-secure tests get stuck early on (I suspect that responses don't get back to the NS core). Reverting 5e68b11764673ee32bae0de8ecf3cde45cc55ea1 "SPM: Trigger scheduler at the end of SPM API" fixes the issue. Was that patch tested with multi-core?
I created a patch to revert that patch for now - https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/11998
Chris Brand
Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com
Hi Ken,
Is this being worked on now, do you know? I'm wondering for how long we should expect dual-core to be broken ...
Thanks,
Chris
From: TF-M tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org On Behalf Of Ken Liu via TF-M Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 7:31 PM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd nd@arm.com Subject: Re: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Caution: This e-mail originated outside Infineon Technologies. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you validate it is safehttps://intranet-content.infineon.com/explore/aboutinfineon/rules/informationsecurity/ug/SocialEngineering/Pages/SocialEngineeringElements_en.aspx.
Hi Chris,
Unfortunately, not tested since the logic is a regarded as a common change that if it can run with IPC then dual-core should not be affected - seems something unexpected occurred.
As there are still come upcoming changes on scheduling under reviewing, let's test these new patches on dual-core and create a fix patch.
Is it okay to keep 11998 for local usage, and back to mainline when issue get fixed? As 5e68b11 is the fundamental patch to make SPM work under thread mode.
Thanks.
/Ken
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of chris.brand--- via TF-M Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 2:25 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Running regression tests with the current HEAD, the secure tests all pass but the non-secure tests get stuck early on (I suspect that responses don't get back to the NS core). Reverting 5e68b11764673ee32bae0de8ecf3cde45cc55ea1 "SPM: Trigger scheduler at the end of SPM API" fixes the issue. Was that patch tested with multi-core?
I created a patch to revert that patch for now - https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/11998
Chris Brand
Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com
Hi Chris,
We have found the root cause and it should be fixed in the next week ASAP.
If you want a quick fix, trigger a pendsv after message dispatching in 'tfm_mailbox_handle_msg' should fix this issue.
BR
/Ken
From: Chris.Brand@infineon.com Chris.Brand@infineon.com Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 11:38 PM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: Ken Liu Ken.Liu@arm.com Subject: RE: PSoC scheduling broken
Hi Ken,
Is this being worked on now, do you know? I'm wondering for how long we should expect dual-core to be broken ...
Thanks,
Chris
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Ken Liu via TF-M Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 7:31 PM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd <nd@arm.commailto:nd@arm.com> Subject: Re: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Caution: This e-mail originated outside Infineon Technologies. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you validate it is safehttps://intranet-content.infineon.com/explore/aboutinfineon/rules/informationsecurity/ug/SocialEngineering/Pages/SocialEngineeringElements_en.aspx.
Hi Chris,
Unfortunately, not tested since the logic is a regarded as a common change that if it can run with IPC then dual-core should not be affected - seems something unexpected occurred.
As there are still come upcoming changes on scheduling under reviewing, let's test these new patches on dual-core and create a fix patch.
Is it okay to keep 11998 for local usage, and back to mainline when issue get fixed? As 5e68b11 is the fundamental patch to make SPM work under thread mode.
Thanks.
/Ken
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of chris.brand--- via TF-M Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 2:25 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Running regression tests with the current HEAD, the secure tests all pass but the non-secure tests get stuck early on (I suspect that responses don't get back to the NS core). Reverting 5e68b11764673ee32bae0de8ecf3cde45cc55ea1 "SPM: Trigger scheduler at the end of SPM API" fixes the issue. Was that patch tested with multi-core?
I created a patch to revert that patch for now - https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/11998
Chris Brand
Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com
Thanks, Ken!
From: TF-M tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org On Behalf Of Ken Liu via TF-M Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 11:43 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd nd@arm.com Subject: Re: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Caution: This e-mail originated outside Infineon Technologies. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you validate it is safehttps://intranet-content.infineon.com/explore/aboutinfineon/rules/informationsecurity/ug/SocialEngineering/Pages/SocialEngineeringElements_en.aspx.
Hi Chris,
We have found the root cause and it should be fixed in the next week ASAP.
If you want a quick fix, trigger a pendsv after message dispatching in 'tfm_mailbox_handle_msg' should fix this issue.
BR
/Ken
From: Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com <Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 11:38 PM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: Ken Liu <Ken.Liu@arm.commailto:Ken.Liu@arm.com> Subject: RE: PSoC scheduling broken
Hi Ken,
Is this being worked on now, do you know? I'm wondering for how long we should expect dual-core to be broken ...
Thanks,
Chris
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Ken Liu via TF-M Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 7:31 PM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd <nd@arm.commailto:nd@arm.com> Subject: Re: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Caution: This e-mail originated outside Infineon Technologies. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you validate it is safehttps://intranet-content.infineon.com/explore/aboutinfineon/rules/informationsecurity/ug/SocialEngineering/Pages/SocialEngineeringElements_en.aspx.
Hi Chris,
Unfortunately, not tested since the logic is a regarded as a common change that if it can run with IPC then dual-core should not be affected - seems something unexpected occurred.
As there are still come upcoming changes on scheduling under reviewing, let's test these new patches on dual-core and create a fix patch.
Is it okay to keep 11998 for local usage, and back to mainline when issue get fixed? As 5e68b11 is the fundamental patch to make SPM work under thread mode.
Thanks.
/Ken
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of chris.brand--- via TF-M Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 2:25 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Running regression tests with the current HEAD, the secure tests all pass but the non-secure tests get stuck early on (I suspect that responses don't get back to the NS core). Reverting 5e68b11764673ee32bae0de8ecf3cde45cc55ea1 "SPM: Trigger scheduler at the end of SPM API" fixes the issue. Was that patch tested with multi-core?
I created a patch to revert that patch for now - https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/11998
Chris Brand
Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com
Hi Chris,
Patch is created here: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/12089
Please take a review or merge if it is okay for you.
BR
/Ken
From: Chris.Brand@infineon.com Chris.Brand@infineon.com Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:49 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: Ken Liu Ken.Liu@arm.com Subject: RE: PSoC scheduling broken
Thanks, Ken!
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Ken Liu via TF-M Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 11:43 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd <nd@arm.commailto:nd@arm.com> Subject: Re: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Caution: This e-mail originated outside Infineon Technologies. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you validate it is safehttps://intranet-content.infineon.com/explore/aboutinfineon/rules/informationsecurity/ug/SocialEngineering/Pages/SocialEngineeringElements_en.aspx.
Hi Chris,
We have found the root cause and it should be fixed in the next week ASAP.
If you want a quick fix, trigger a pendsv after message dispatching in 'tfm_mailbox_handle_msg' should fix this issue.
BR
/Ken
From: Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com <Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 11:38 PM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: Ken Liu <Ken.Liu@arm.commailto:Ken.Liu@arm.com> Subject: RE: PSoC scheduling broken
Hi Ken,
Is this being worked on now, do you know? I'm wondering for how long we should expect dual-core to be broken ...
Thanks,
Chris
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Ken Liu via TF-M Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 7:31 PM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: nd <nd@arm.commailto:nd@arm.com> Subject: Re: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Caution: This e-mail originated outside Infineon Technologies. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you validate it is safehttps://intranet-content.infineon.com/explore/aboutinfineon/rules/informationsecurity/ug/SocialEngineering/Pages/SocialEngineeringElements_en.aspx.
Hi Chris,
Unfortunately, not tested since the logic is a regarded as a common change that if it can run with IPC then dual-core should not be affected - seems something unexpected occurred.
As there are still come upcoming changes on scheduling under reviewing, let's test these new patches on dual-core and create a fix patch.
Is it okay to keep 11998 for local usage, and back to mainline when issue get fixed? As 5e68b11 is the fundamental patch to make SPM work under thread mode.
Thanks.
/Ken
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of chris.brand--- via TF-M Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 2:25 AM To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.orgmailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: [TF-M] PSoC scheduling broken
Running regression tests with the current HEAD, the secure tests all pass but the non-secure tests get stuck early on (I suspect that responses don't get back to the NS core). Reverting 5e68b11764673ee32bae0de8ecf3cde45cc55ea1 "SPM: Trigger scheduler at the end of SPM API" fixes the issue. Was that patch tested with multi-core?
I created a patch to revert that patch for now - https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/11998
Chris Brand
Cypress Semiconductor (Canada), Inc. Sr Prin Software Engr CSCA CSS ICW SW PSW 1 Office: +1 778 234 0515 Chris.Brand@infineon.commailto:Chris.Brand@infineon.com
tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org
-
Chris.Brand＠infineon.com -
Ken Liu