Hi,
This is to notify that we are planning to target the Trusted Firmware-A 2.2 release during the third week of October as part of the regular 6 month cadence. The aim is to consolidate all TF-A work since the 2.1 release. As part of this, a release candidate tag will be created and release activities will commence from Monday October 7th. Essentially we will not merge any major enhancements from this date until the release is made. Please ensure any Pull Requests (PR's) desired to make the 2.2 release are submitted in good time to be complete by Friday October 4th. Any major enhancement PR's still open after that date will not be merged until after the release.
Thanks & best regards,
[cid:image001.jpg@01D57244.98C07530]
Bipin Ravi | Principal Design Engineer
Bipin.Ravi(a)arm.com<mailto:Joshua.Sunil@arm.com> | Skype: Bipin.Ravi.ARM
Direct: +1-512-225 -1071 | Mobile: +1-214-212-0794
5707 Southwest Parkway, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78735
Hi,
We are going to configure Coverity Scan Online to make it send
notifications to this mailing list. This way, everyone subscribed on
this mailing list will be aware of newly detected/eliminated defects
found by the tool.
The report will provide a summary of the findings (their nature,
location in the source code). In order to look up the details or to
triage them, you will still need to access the database through the web
portal on
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/arm-software-arm-trusted-firmware .
As a reminder, you will need to create an account to view the defects
there (it's possible to use your Github account).
This is expected to generate a low volume of emails, as we typically do
1 analysis per week day.
As a heads up, the web interface mentions that "an authorization
confirmation will be sent to each newly provided email address and must
be acknowledged before notifications will be sent". In which case,
please ignore these emails.
Regards,
Sandrine
Hi Tristan,
Can you please clarify what your exact concern is? Which files and what text exactly? That will help us answer your concern.
Thanks
Joanna
On 16/09/2019, 23:48, "TF-A on behalf of Tristan Muntsinger via TF-A" <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org on behalf of tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
Hello all,
It looks like the copyright guidance on this project changed about a year
ago (Nov 13, 2018) to a placeholder and hasn't been corrected yet. Can
this be fixed to make the license valid so the project can be legally
redistributed per BSD-3 as intended?
Thanks,
Tristan Muntsinger
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
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 Dan,
Whoops, sorry, this fell through the cracks for me since I wasn't on
the to: line. Thanks for your response!
> OK I can see the use of that, although I'd be a bit concerned about such a thing being available as a general service in case it gets used as an attack vector. For example, a test program could aggressively use this service to try to get the firmware to leak secure world information or something about its behaviour.
Yes, of course, we can gate this with a build option so it would only
be available where desired.
> However, I think there might already be support for what you need. PSCI is part of the standard service and the function SYSTEM_RESET2 allows for both architectural and vendor-specific resets. The latter allows for vendor-specific semantics, which could include crashing the firmware as you suggest.
>
> Chrome OS could specify what such a vendor-specific reset looks like and each Chromebook's platform PSCI hooks could be implemented accordingly.
Right, but defining a separate vendor-specific reset type for each
platform is roughly the same as defining a separate SiP SMC for each
of them. It's the same problem that the SMC/PSCI spec and the TF
repository layout is only designed to deal with generic vs.
SoC-vendor-specific differentiation. If the normal world OS needs a
feature, we can only make it generic or duplicate it across all
vendors running that OS.
> Alternatively, this could potentially be defined as an additional architectural reset. This would enable a generic implementation but would require approval/definition by Arm's Architecture team. Like me they might have concerns about this being defined at a generic architectural level.
Yes, I think that would be the best option. Could you kick off that
process with the Architecture team? Or tell me who I should talk to
about this?
Thanks,
Julius
Hello all,
It looks like the copyright guidance on this project changed about a year
ago (Nov 13, 2018) to a placeholder and hasn't been corrected yet. Can
this be fixed to make the license valid so the project can be legally
redistributed per BSD-3 as intended?
Thanks,
Tristan Muntsinger
Hi Yann,
You are quite correct. We will be looking to create a v2.2 tag release sometime early to mid October. You can expect a more formal notification and a request to get any patches submitted in the next week or so. As in previous releases master will be generally locked for a week or so while closedown testing is performed although we will assess incoming patches to see if they can be taken with low risk.
Joanna
On 16/09/2019, 13:19, "TF-A on behalf of Yann GAUTIER via TF-A" <tf-a-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org on behalf of tf-a(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
Hi,
From the wiki page https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/tf-a_release_information/, the next v2.2 tag may be released soon.
But the exact timeframe is not yet published.
The wiki page might be updated if you have more information.
When do you expect to release tag v2.2?
What will be the deadline to send patches upstream?
Thanks,
Yann
--
TF-A mailing list
TF-A(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a
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,
>From the wiki page https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/tf-a_release_information/, the next v2.2 tag may be released soon.
But the exact timeframe is not yet published.
The wiki page might be updated if you have more information.
When do you expect to release tag v2.2?
What will be the deadline to send patches upstream?
Thanks,
Yann
Hi Soby,
> Hi Julius,
> Apologize for the radio silence as I was on sabbatical. Yes, I agree the
> project needs to have a clear policy around platforms. We will get this
> started on our end and send a policy proposal for review.
No problem, thanks to Sandrine for taking care of it so quickly.
Unfortunately we now discovered that we're still stuck on the same
issue with MT8173. Could one of you please help getting
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/990/31
landed to fix that too?
Thanks,
Julius