Just an update to this,
I have merged the patch which upgrades to the latest mbedTLS tag. The PSA Arch initial attestation test suite fails to build after this merge due to width change of `ecc_curve_t` type. The issue is reported here in PSA Arch test github project : https://github.com/ARM-software/psa-arch-tests/pull/232
The patch for changing the ITS_MAX_ASSET_SIZE is still outstanding and I hope to merge it after a week.
Best Regards
Soby Mathew
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Soby Mathew via TF-M
Sent: 11 August 2020 16:24
To: TF-M mailing list <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-M] Patch to upgrade crypto service to use latest mbedTLS tag (v2.23.0)
Hi Everyone
The following patch updates the crypto service in TF-M to use the latest mbedTLS tag v2.23.0. All reviews for the same will be much appreciated.
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/5252/1
With this update, additional PSA APIs psa_hash_compute() and psa_hash_compare() are now supported.
There is also another patch for platforms to update the ITS_MAX_ASSET_SIZE when testing with PSA Crypto API compliance test as one of the tests require a larger size: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/5253/1 . Could the platform owners review the same and let me know whether the size changes are OK ?
With the above patches, the API compliance remains the same as v1.0 Beta 3 and the PSA Crypto compliance test suite gives the below results (as tested on AN521) :
************ Crypto Suite Report **********
TOTAL TESTS : 61
TOTAL PASSED : 42
TOTAL SIM ERROR : 0
TOTAL FAILED : 17
TOTAL SKIPPED : 2
******************************************
Best Regards
Soby Mathes
Thanks Andrew for the update. Just to confirm that AN521 is not affected.
Best Regards
Soby Mathew
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Andrew Murray via TF-M
Sent: 20 August 2020 08:04
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Deprecate AN539 platform
Hi Thomas :)
Thanks for that note about the AN521.
I've just checked and I was mistaken - it is in fact the AN521 that I am using (rather than the AN539).
I therefore have no objection to the deprecation.
Sorry about wasting your time :(
Andrew ;)
--
Andrew Murray
indie Semiconductor |Technical Director | MCU Architectures & Security
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Thomas Törnblom" <thomas.tornblom(a)iar.com<mailto:thomas.tornblom@iar.com>>
To: <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 08:51:34 +0200
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Deprecate AN539 platform
AN521 is also mps2+/m33.
Hi Thomas :)
Thanks for that note about the AN521.
I've just checked and I was mistaken - it is in fact the AN521 that I am
using (rather than the AN539).
*I therefore have no objection to the deprecation*.
Sorry about wasting your time :(
Andrew ;)
*--*
*Andrew Murray*
*indie Semiconductor |Technical Director | MCU Architectures & Security*
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Thomas Törnblom" <thomas.tornblom(a)iar.com>
To: <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 08:51:34 +0200
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Deprecate AN539 platform
AN521 is also mps2+/m33.
For some reason that I've not been able to track down, using -DBL2=False
on the cmake command line causes ASM_FLAGS to have duplicated debug
flags and defines.
It does not happen to C_FLAGS and it doesn't happen with -DBL2=True.
I've worked around the issue in
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/5365, but
a cleaner solution would be to avoid this in the first place.
I would appreciate if someone with more cmake experience could have a go
at this.
It causes build failures with IAR, and ARMCLANG and GNUARM doesn't care
about the duplicates.
Thomas
--
*Thomas Törnblom*, /Product Engineer/
IAR Systems AB
Box 23051, Strandbodgatan 1
SE-750 23 Uppsala, SWEDEN
Mobile: +46 76 180 17 80 Fax: +46 18 16 78 01
E-mail: thomas.tornblom(a)iar.com <mailto:thomas.tornblom@iar.com>
Website: www.iar.com <http://www.iar.com>
Twitter: www.twitter.com/iarsystems <http://www.twitter.com/iarsystems>
AN521 is also mps2+/m33.
Den 2020-08-20 kl. 08:48, skrev Andrew Murray via TF-M:
> Hi Soby ;)
>
> I'm currently using an MPS2+ board with the AN539 system to experiment
> with TF-M code for a new M33-based, IC design. Does "deprecating the
> AN539 platform" effectively mean deprecating TF-M support for the
> MPS2+ FPGA platform entirely? In other words: is AN539 the only
> example subsystem for the MPS2+ board that supports the M33 and TF-M?
> If it is, then I'd like to object (for what that's worth!)
>
> (Feel free to try to persuade me of the merits of an alternative
> prototyping platform.)
>
> Andrew ;)
>
> /--/
>
> /Andrew Murray/
>
> /indie Semiconductor |Technical Director | MCU Architectures & Security/
>
> //
>
>
>
> ...
> From: Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew(a)arm.com <mailto:Soby.Mathew@arm.com>>
> To: TF-M mailing list <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> <mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:11:36 +0000
> Subject: [TF-M] Deprecate AN539 platform
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> As mentioned in
> https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m.git/tree/docs/contr…,
> we would like to propose the deprecation of AN539 MPS2 platform and
> remove the same from TF-M master after next release. As per the
> process, this proposal will be open for discussion for a period of 4
> weeks and if there are no major objections, the platform will be
> marked as deprecated.
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> Soby Mathew
>
>
--
*Thomas Törnblom*, /Product Engineer/
IAR Systems AB
Box 23051, Strandbodgatan 1
SE-750 23 Uppsala, SWEDEN
Mobile: +46 76 180 17 80 Fax: +46 18 16 78 01
E-mail: thomas.tornblom(a)iar.com <mailto:thomas.tornblom@iar.com>
Website: www.iar.com <http://www.iar.com>
Twitter: www.twitter.com/iarsystems <http://www.twitter.com/iarsystems>
Hi Soby ;)
I'm currently using an MPS2+ board with the AN539 system to experiment with
TF-M code for a new M33-based, IC design. Does "deprecating the AN539
platform" effectively mean deprecating TF-M support for the MPS2+ FPGA
platform entirely? In other words: is AN539 the only example subsystem for
the MPS2+ board that supports the M33 and TF-M? If it is, then I'd like
to object (for what that's worth!)
(Feel free to try to persuade me of the merits of an alternative
prototyping platform.)
Andrew ;)
*--*
*Andrew Murray*
*indie Semiconductor |Technical Director | MCU Architectures & Security*
...
From: Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew(a)arm.com>
To: TF-M mailing list <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:11:36 +0000
Subject: [TF-M] Deprecate AN539 platform
Hi Everyone,
As mentioned in
https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m.git/tree/docs/contr…,
we would like to propose the deprecation of AN539 MPS2 platform and remove
the same from TF-M master after next release. As per the process, this
proposal will be open for discussion for a period of 4 weeks and if there
are no major objections, the platform will be marked as deprecated.
Thanks & Regards
Soby Mathew
Hello,
The agenda is empty since no topics were proposed.
I will start the session anyway for ad-hoc discussions or Q&A, but feel free to treat it as cancelled and enjoy your vacation season.
The best,
Anton Komlev
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Anton Komlev via TF-M
Sent: 12 August 2020 13:56
To: 'tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org' <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: [TF-M] TF-M Technical Forum call - August 20
Hello,
The next Technical Forum is planned on Thursday, August 20 at 6:00-07:00 UTC (Asia time zone).
Please reply on this email with your proposals for agenda topics.
Recording and slides of previous meetings are here:
https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/tf-m-technical-forum/
Best regards,
Anton Komlev
Hi Everyone,
As mentioned in https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m.git/tree/docs/contr…, we would like to propose the deprecation of AN539 MPS2 platform and remove the same from TF-M master after next release. As per the process, this proposal will be open for discussion for a period of 4 weeks and if there are no major objections, the platform will be marked as deprecated.
Thanks & Regards
Soby Mathew
