Hi all
I am porting a new SoC to TF-M platform. I know I have missed something in my platform files that I am getting following error message, can someone please guide me. Thanks
Built target manifest_tool
[ 3%] Building C object platform/CMakeFiles/platform_s.dir/ext/common/uart_stdout.o
[ 4%] Building C object platform/CMakeFiles/platform_s.dir/ext/common/template/nv_counters.o
[ 6%] Building C object platform/CMakeFiles/platform_s.dir/ext/common/template/flash_otp_nv_counters_backend.o
[ 6%] Building C object platform/CMakeFiles/platform_s.dir/ext/common/template/otp_flash.o
[ 7%] Building C object platform/CMakeFiles/platform_s.dir/ext/common/provisioning.o
[ 8%] Linking C static library libplatform_s.a
[ 12%] Built target platform_s
[ 13%] Building C object secure_fw/partitions/lib/runtime/CMakeFiles/tfm_sprt.dir/service_api.o
[ 13%] Building C object secure_fw/partitions/lib/runtime/CMakeFiles/tfm_sprt.dir/__/__/__/spm/core/psa_interface_sfn.o
[ 13%] Building C object secure_fw/partitions/lib/runtime/CMakeFiles/tfm_sprt.dir/__/__/__/__/interface/src/tfm_psa_call.o
[ 14%] Linking C static library libtfm_sprt.a
[ 17%] Built target tfm_sprt
[ 17%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/tfm_boot_data.o
[ 17%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/utilities.o
[ 18%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/arch/tfm_arch.o
[ 18%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/main.o
[ 19%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/spm_ipc.o
[ 19%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/rom_loader.o
[ 20%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/psa_api.o
[ 20%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/psa_call_api.o
[ 20%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/psa_version_api.o
[ 21%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/psa_read_write_skip_api.o
[ 21%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/backend_sfn.o
[ 23%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/tfm_svcalls.o
[ 23%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/tfm_pools.o
[ 24%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/ns_client_ext/tfm_spm_ns_ctx.o
[ 24%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/spm_local_connection.o
[ 24%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/core/arch/tfm_arch_v8m_main.o
[ 25%] Building C object secure_fw/spm/CMakeFiles/tfm_spm.dir/__/__/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.o
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c: In function 'tfm_hal_irq_enable':
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:21:5: warning: implicit declaration of function 'NVIC_EnableIRQ' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
21 | NVIC_EnableIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:21:21: error: 'IRQn_Type' undeclared (first use in this function)
21 | NVIC_EnableIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ^~~~~~~~~
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:21:21: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:21:31: error: expected ')' before 'irq_num'
21 | NVIC_EnableIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ~ ^~~~~~~
| )
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c: In function 'tfm_hal_irq_disable':
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:28:5: warning: implicit declaration of function 'NVIC_DisableIRQ' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
28 | NVIC_DisableIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:28:22: error: 'IRQn_Type' undeclared (first use in this function)
28 | NVIC_DisableIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ^~~~~~~~~
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:28:32: error: expected ')' before 'irq_num'
28 | NVIC_DisableIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ~ ^~~~~~~
| )
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c: In function 'tfm_hal_irq_clear_pending':
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:35:5: warning: implicit declaration of function 'NVIC_ClearPendingIRQ' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
35 | NVIC_ClearPendingIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:35:27: error: 'IRQn_Type' undeclared (first use in this function)
35 | NVIC_ClearPendingIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
| ^~~~~~~~~
C:/trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/common/tfm_hal_nvic.c:35:37: error: expected ')' before 'irq_num'
35 | NVIC_ClearPendingIRQ((IRQn_Type)irq_num);
Hi Maulik,
Thanks for your support.
1. I think I understand why you don’t get the error on the Musca-B1. In fact, we are not using the same flash driver:
1.1. My build uses the `emulated_flash_dvr`, which checks that the byte is erased in flash before attempting a write (this is where I get the error).
1.2. The Musca-B1 platform uses the `qspi_ip6514e_drv`, which does not perform such a check before writing to the flash. From what I understand, the MT25QL Series Flash NOR does not return an error even if you try to write a 1 in a bit that was 0. As such, you do not encounter the error.
2. It is strange that you don’t get the warning when MCUBOOT_CONFIRM_IMAGE=OFF.
Best regards,
Cédric
Hello Cedric,
I built with both MCUBOOT_CONFIRM_IMAGE=OFF (default config for musca b1) and MCUBOOT_CONFIRM_IMAGE=ON and in both cases, I do not get any error/warning.
Running Test Suite PSA firmware update NS interface tests (TFM_NS_FWU_TEST_1xxx)...
> Executing 'TFM_NS_FWU_TEST_1001'
Description: 'Functionity test.'
TEST: TFM_NS_FWU_TEST_1001 - PASSED!
> Executing 'TFM_NS_FWU_TEST_1002'
...
Best Regards,
Maulik
________________________________
From: tf-m-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 13 June 2024 1:00 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: TF-M Digest, Vol 68, Issue 13
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. Re: Firmware Update: Storage Failure While Rejecting a Staged Image
(cedric.klikpo(a)scalinx.com)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 14:06:16 -0000
From: cedric.klikpo(a)scalinx.com
Subject: [TF-M] Re: Firmware Update: Storage Failure While Rejecting a
Staged Image
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Message-ID:
<171820117605.1175.3411332003376446357(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Maulik,
Sorry, I forgot to mention that I got the error when the image is built with the option "MCUBOOT_CONFIRM_IMAGE" enabled.
When, when this option is not enable, I do not get the error, and the FWU test status is PASSED. However, the test is marked as passed with the following warning, which clearly states that the testcase is skipped:
```
Executing 'TFM_NS_FWU_TEST_1001'
Description: 'Functionality test.'
The component isn't in READY state: the device is not ready to run FWU tests, skip FWU test: 1. TEST: TFM_NS_FWU_TEST_1001 - PASSED!
```
So, I would like to confirm with you:
1. When you enable the option "MCUBOOT_CONFIRM_IMAGE," does your TFM_NS_FWU_TEST_1001 testcase pass?
2. When you disable the option "MCUBOOT_CONFIRM_IMAGE," do you get the same warning?
Best regards,
Cédric
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
TF-M mailing list -- tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to tf-m-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
------------------------------
End of TF-M Digest, Vol 68, Issue 13
************************************
Hello Cedric
Unfortunately we only have musca b1 support for FWU at the moment. However as you mentioned, I did try TFM version 1.8.0 on commit *35ac80c85 and all tests (secure and non-secure including FWU) passes without any issues.
Best Regards,
Maulik
Hello Cedric,
I tried the FWU tests on musca b1 platform and all of them passes without any failures.
Could you please provide more context on specific version/commit or platform where you encounter PSA_ERROR_STORAGE_FAILURE?
Best Regards,
Maulik
________________________________
From: tf-m-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 07 June 2024 1:00 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: TF-M Digest, Vol 68, Issue 6
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. Firmware Update: Storage Failure While Rejecting a Staged Image
(cedric.klikpo(a)scalinx.com)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 13:00:29 -0000
From: cedric.klikpo(a)scalinx.com
Subject: [TF-M] Firmware Update: Storage Failure While Rejecting a
Staged Image
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Message-ID:
<171767882935.438215.6657950002748011855(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi,
I encounter a storage failure when trying to reject a staged image. I get this error by executing `tfm_fwu_test_common_001` in `fwu_tests_common.c`. The error occurs when the `erase_boot_magic` function attempts to erase the magic number in the image trailer by writing erase into it.
The reason I am writing this post is to ask:
1. If the `erase_boot_magic` failure is a known bug in the firmware update, is a fix planned or existing?
2. Why doesn't the `erase_boot_magic` function erase the sector where the magic number is located in the image trailer, considering we erasing in a flash?
Thanks!
Best regards,
Cedric
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
TF-M mailing list -- tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to tf-m-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
------------------------------
End of TF-M Digest, Vol 68, Issue 6
***********************************
Hi,
I noticed that trusted-firmware-m\interface\src\tfm_crypto_api.c defines two API_DISPATCH macros for psa_call(). It is used most of the time in the file, but I still see ~10 instances where psa_call() is used. Can it be changed to consistently use the API_DISPATCH macros.
Regards,
Brian Quach
SimpleLink MCU
Texas Instruments Inc.
Hi TF-M community,
TF-M allows Semiconductor vendors to plug in their HW accelerator using PSA cryptoprocessor driver interface. I have a couple of questions in terms of the driver interface.
1.
To port customized HW accelerator to TF-M's Crypto service for TF-M v2.1.0 LTS using driver interface, for the multipart operation, https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls/blob/zephyr/docs/proposed/psa… states that "A driver that implements a multi-part operation must define all of the entry points in this family as well as a type that represents the operation context." Take aead encrypt as an example, if the underlying hardware does not support aead_abort, could it implements aead_abort by simply return PSA_ERROR_NOT_SUPPORTED?
2.
The driver interface depends heavily on psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h to dispatch operations to customized HW accelerator, where the psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h file is automatically generated by scripts/data_files/driver_templates/psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h.jinja. To port customized HW accelerator to TF-M's Crypto service for TF-M v2.1.0 LTS, would the approach be creating a customized psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h.jinja file, the driver description file in JSON, and entry point functions. If so and we are considering upstreaming TF-M in the future, all these files would go inside platform/ext/accelerator/<vendor name>. Efforts need to be made so files such as psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h.jinja should point to mbedtls, right? Additionally, as .jinja is retiring (mentioned in another email exchange), how would semi vendors update psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h in the future?
[https://opengraph.githubassets.com/c87e79773a7fb0841ea038f7cf3dfdf4170debb8…]<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls/blob/zephyr/docs/proposed/psa…>
mbedtls/docs/proposed/psa-driver-interface.md at zephyr · zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls/blob/zephyr/docs/proposed/psa…>
mbedtls module for Zephyr, this is not a mirror of the official mbedtls repository. - zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls
github.com
Thank you very much!
Best regards
Hi,
I encounter a storage failure when trying to reject a staged image. I get this error by executing `tfm_fwu_test_common_001` in `fwu_tests_common.c`. The error occurs when the `erase_boot_magic` function attempts to erase the magic number in the image trailer by writing erase into it.
The reason I am writing this post is to ask:
1. If the `erase_boot_magic` failure is a known bug in the firmware update, is a fix planned or existing?
2. Why doesn't the `erase_boot_magic` function erase the sector where the magic number is located in the image trailer, considering we erasing in a flash?
Thanks!
Best regards,
Cedric
Hello,
I want to bring community attention to a bug fix in build script for NS application:
In the original design we shall have a single CMake target 'tfm_api_ns' prepared and exported by SPE for building NSPE with consistent configuration. At some moment 2 extra targets 'tfm_api_ns_tz' and 'tfm_api_ns_mailbox' were introduced for different S-NS communication methods to be linked to tfm_api_ns on NS side. This created unnecessary NS dependency on SPE configuration and disallows creating NS application working with all platforms.
This patch is fixing the issue:
https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m/+/29005
Ideally, we should remove these redundant targets but that will break projects already adjusted and using them. There are 2 approaches to address the issue:
1. Preferred. Remove the targets and ask dependent projects for adjustment. (effectively, is 1 line change to stop linking to them).
2. Keep those targets as empty dummies for compatibility, polluting the code.
Please comment and object the removal (approach 1) if it's critical for your project. I would appreciate your feedback within 2 weeks to make the right decision.
Thanks,
Anton
Hello,
I followed this tutorial to add an example secure partition in TF-M ( https://tf-m-user-guide.trustedfirmware.org/integration_guide/services/tfm_… ) and then followed these instructions to flash the application to my Nucleo-L552ZE-Q board ( https://tf-m-user-guide.trustedfirmware.org/platform/stm/common/stm32l5xx/r… ). However, the script regression.sh returned the error:
Error: Cannot connect to access port 0!
If you are trying to connect to a device with TrustZone enabled please try to connect with HotPlug mode.
If you are trying to connect to a device which supports Debug Authentication with certificate or password, please open your device using it.
After this, I am unable to connect my board STM32Cube Programmer or to flash any application using Keil MDK ARM, CubeIDE, etc. The same error is returned every time. Before I runned the regression.sh script, the board was working as expected and I was able to flash simple applications (non using TF-M) to the board. I've already tried to connect the board to the STM32Cube Programmer using the Hot Plug mode - (i) pulled BOOT0 pin to HIGH, (ii) connected the board to the PC, (iii) selected Hot Plug mode in STM32Cube Programmer and Hit Connect - but did not work. I get this log:
[cid:20937ade-7ed2-4beb-bced-d577c3e58dd3]