Hi All,
In case you missed a session of interest at Linaro Connect, the recorded
sessions and accompanying presentations are now posted on line
<https://connect.linaro.org/resources/lvc21f/lvc21f-212>.
I've attached a Session Resource List to this email as well that has been
created to quickly find sessions of interest based upon topics.
Best regards,
Don
Attendees:
Dan Handley (Arm, chair)
Joanna Farley (Arm)
Shebu Varghese Kuriakose (Arm)
Matteo Carlini (Arm)
Joakim Bech (Linaro)
David Brown (Linaro)
Don Harbin (Linaro)
Eric Finco (ST)
Lionel Debieve (ST)
KangKang Shen (Futurewei)
Michael Thomas (Renesas)
Julius Werner (Google)
Kevin Oerton (NXMLabs)
Andrey Butok (NXP)
Shebu presented Mbed TLS roadmap (attached)
KO: How will the Crypto Driver API be used.
SK: This is a back-end HAL interface for crypto-processors to plug in to. The front-end interface will always be the PSA Crypto API.
KO: Will this driver API help add support for certs that Mbed TLS doesn't support yet?
Shebu: No, the fron- end interface will always be via the Mbed TLS and PSA Crypto APIs. Adding new cert support would be a separate work item. Currently we're more focussed on new crypto algorithm support.
KO: For A-profile, is there a dependency on the Trusted Services (TS) project?
SVK: TS uses PSA Crypto, as does TF-A. There is some plumbing still to do with FF-A if you want to call PSA Crypto APIs from the normal world and route that through to TS or a Secure Element backend.
MT: When will there be a 3.x LTS branch?
SVK: Will consider the next LTS in 2022. The last 2.x branch will be an LTS. We don't have firm plans for a 3.x LTS branch yet.
MT: Even if you update Mbed TLS to use the PSA Crypto API, some partners will continue to use the legacy Mbed TLS crypto APIs (via Mbed TLS) since they will only use LTS branches. They will not move until there is an LTS that uses the PSA Crypto APIs.
DH: The strategy is to clean up the dependencies on the legacy crypto APIs through the 3.x series of releases. Eventually Mbed TLS will not have a dependency on the legacy APIs. Even then, backwards compatibility will be maintained in the legacy APIs. Support for the legacy APIs would not be removed until a (TBD) 4.0 release.
KO: Is there any overhead to using PSA Crypto API.
SVK: We haven't actually measured this.
DH: There will be a small overhead in the current implementation as these effectively wrap the legacy API implementations. There's no overhead due to the APIs themselves. Through the 3.x series of releases, the implementation will be inverted so that the legacy APIs will wrap the PSA Crypto API implementations. Then the overhead will be in the legacy implementation instead.
Matteo presented the TF-A roadmap: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/roadmap/
EF: What is firmware transparency? Is it a device side or server side technology?
MC: It's related to firmware attestation, which is about collecting firmware measurements and providing them to a relying party in the form of an attestation token.
DH: Actually, it’s a bit orthogonal to attestation. Attestation is about providing evidence to a (possibly remote) relying party in order enable functionality (e.g. provisioning of secrets).
DH: Firmware transparency is about making that evidence (in the form of certificates) available to anyone in a verifiable data store, so they can trust the firmware on a device is what it says it is
JB: So it's similar to TPM?
DH: Hmm, not exactly but the measurements may be stored in a TPM on the device.
DH: The project we’re interested in here is Google Trillian: https://opensource.google/projects/trillian
DH: This is really a server side technology but there may be some alignment activities to do on the device side
EF: What is the 32-bit support about in the roadmap?
SVK: This is related to Trusted Services (TS). It's about running legacy 32-bit TAs within TS, which is extra work
MC: Phabricator page for this: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/roadmap/
MC: Plan is to create a common landing page with Don for all roadmaps
AOB:
DH: Someone in Arm pointed out that the tagline on the tf.org website is not strictly accurate:
"OPEN SOURCE SECURE WORLD SOFTWARE"
DH: Some of the software does not necessarily reside in the secure world (e.g. Mbed TLS, Trusted Services, Future CCA support)
DH: Proposal is to just remove the word "World".
JK: Makes sense. I thought that too.
(No-one disagreed)
SVK: There's another reference on that page too.
DH: Yes, we may need to remove this in several places on the website.
ACTION: Dan to work with Don on changing "secure world" to "secure" on the website
JB: Board wanted more visibility into the security process, e.g. how fast are we to respond, what issues are in flight, etc...
DH: OK, as long as this isn't leaking security critical info to people who are not necessarily part of the security teams.
JB: Yes, of course. This is just about seeing how well the process is working, not the issues themselves
DH: My other concern is not putting too much extra process on the security teams.
JB: I have an action to propose something that is workable here.
DonH: Would like more of the tech people on the teams to propose topics at future conferences, e.g. the OSFC
DH: Arm folk have quite a few presentations at last week's LVC but perhaps not OSFC.
DonH: Yes, I was looking for more than just Arm people.
Regards
Dan.
-----Original Appointment-----
From: Don Harbin <don.harbin(a)linaro.org<mailto:don.harbin@linaro.org>>
Sent: 14 April 2021 15:08
To: Don Harbin; Joakim Bech; Bill Fletcher (bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org<mailto:bill.fletcher@linaro.org>); lionel.debieve(a)st.com<mailto:lionel.debieve@st.com>; andrey.butok(a)nxp.com<mailto:andrey.butok@nxp.com>; Nicusor Penisoara; Abhishek Pandit; Eric Finco (eric.finco(a)st.com<mailto:eric.finco@st.com>); k.karasev(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:k.karasev@omprussia.ru>; kevin(a)nxmlabs.com<mailto:kevin@nxmlabs.com>; David Brown; David Cocca; kangkang.shen(a)futurewei.com<mailto:kangkang.shen@futurewei.com>; Dan Handley; roman.baker(a)cypress.com<mailto:roman.baker@cypress.com>; Kevin Townsend (kevin.townsend(a)linaro.org<mailto:kevin.townsend@linaro.org>); reinauer(a)google.com<mailto:reinauer@google.com>; Serban Constantinescu; a.rybakov(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:a.rybakov@omprussia.ru>; Julius Werner; roman.baker(a)infineon.com<mailto:roman.baker@infineon.com>
Subject: Trusted Firmware TSC
When: 16 September 2021 09:00-09:55 America/Los_Angeles.
Where: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/96393644990?pwd=VXlGeFF1Z2U3UTlwbmNhRTZYeE5lZz…
This event has been changed with this note:
"Adjusting due to time zone changes"
Trusted Firmware TSC
When
Changed: Monthly from 9am to 9:55am on the third Thursday 9 times Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Where
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/96393644990?pwd=VXlGeFF1Z2U3UTlwbmNhRTZYeE5lZz… (map<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fj%2F9639364…>)
Calendar
dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@arm.com>
Who
•
Don Harbin - organizer
•
Joakim Bech
•
Bill Fletcher
•
lionel.debieve(a)st.com<mailto:lionel.debieve@st.com>
•
andrey.butok(a)nxp.com<mailto:andrey.butok@nxp.com>
•
nicusor.penisoara(a)nxp.com<mailto:nicusor.penisoara@nxp.com>
•
abhishek.pandit(a)arm.com<mailto:abhishek.pandit@arm.com>
•
eric.finco(a)st.com<mailto:eric.finco@st.com>
•
k.karasev(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:k.karasev@omprussia.ru>
•
kevin(a)nxmlabs.com<mailto:kevin@nxmlabs.com>
•
David Brown
•
david.cocca(a)renesas.com<mailto:david.cocca@renesas.com>
•
kangkang.shen(a)futurewei.com<mailto:kangkang.shen@futurewei.com>
•
dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@arm.com>
•
roman.baker(a)cypress.com<mailto:roman.baker@cypress.com>
•
kevin.townsend(a)linaro.org<mailto:kevin.townsend@linaro.org>
•
reinauer(a)google.com<mailto:reinauer@google.com>
•
Serban Constantinescu
•
a.rybakov(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:a.rybakov@omprussia.ru>
•
Julius Werner
•
roman.baker(a)infineon.com<mailto:roman.baker@infineon.com>
more details »<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=c2NxdnQzczZubWpt…>
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: TrustedFirmware TSC
Time: Dec 17, 2020 05:00 PM London
Every month on the Third Thu, 12 occurrence(s)
Dec 17, 2020 05:00 PM
Jan 21, 2021 05:00 PM
Feb 18, 2021 05:00 PM
Mar 18, 2021 05:00 PM
Apr 15, 2021 05:00 PM
May 20, 2021 05:00 PM
Jun 17, 2021 05:00 PM
Jul 15, 2021 05:00 PM
Aug 19, 2021 05:00 PM
Sep 16, 2021 05:00 PM
Oct 21, 2021 05:00 PM
Nov 18, 2021 05:00 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system.
Monthly: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJIufuquqj8jE9QUXZNeFMnKKzozNj9SWM72/ics…<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fmeeting%2Ft…>
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/96393644990?pwd=VXlGeFF1Z2U3UTlwbmNhRTZYeE5lZz…<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fj%2F9639364…>
Meeting ID: 963 9364 4990
Passcode: roadRunner
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,96393644990# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,96393644990# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington D.C)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 963 9364 4990
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aegtEd7Roj<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fu%2FaegtEd7…>
Going (dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@arm.com>)? All events in this series: Yes<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND&eid=c2NxdnQzczZub…> - Maybe<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND&eid=c2NxdnQzczZub…> - No<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND&eid=c2NxdnQzczZub…> more options »<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=c2NxdnQzczZubWpt…>
Invitation from Google Calendar<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/>
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@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/ 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://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding>.
Abhishek, all
referring to the minutes of our July meeting - see point highlighted in yellow below, TF-A was foreseen as the focus topic of the next TSC meeting. It was expected to take place in August but the August meeting has been cancelled so is TF-A slot postponed accordingly meaning is it the main topic of this week TSC ?
Regards,
Eric
[Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: logo_big5]
Eric FINCO | Tel: +33 (0)2 4402 7154
MDG | Technical Specialist
Fellow, Technical Staff College (TSC) France Board Chairman
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Don Harbin via TSC
Sent: mardi 3 août 2021 17:07
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-TSC] July 20 Trusted Firmware TSC Meeting minutes
Hi,
Please find the minutes from the last call below
Attendees: Don, Abhishek, Anton Komlev<mailto:Anton.Komlev@arm.com>, Dave Cocca, David Brown, Shebu, Julius, Andrej Bujok, Eric Finco, Michael Thomas, Kevin Oerton, Kevin Townsend
Minutes:
* TF-M release / roadmap update - Shebu
* See slides
* 1.4.0 - 4 months release cadence
* Docs deficiencies have been a focus.
* Need MCU update to Mbed TLS 3.0 - getting support from David Brown.
* Asure RTOS work within Linaro - a couple of Pull Requests are queued
* EF: Patches limited to TF-M?
* SK: In Azure RTOS and Threadx
* MT: Jump to 3.0 pretty big?
* MT: Calls only to PSA crypto?
* SK: Ongoing, uses a mix of legacy and later API's
* SK: Community push for clean-ups before migration is completed. Not a completion point for PSA crypto.
* SK: A new LTS will happen this quarter
* Public Roadmap Slide
* Anton provided overview
* SK: Looking at profiling to understand context switching overhead when go from Normal to Secure World
* Authentication Debug Access Control (ADAC) development being looked at and how to migrate to TF-M
* MT: PSA ADAC Spec: Location?
* SK: In the PSA specification page
* EF: Concerning F/W Update, some services enhancements in 1.4 - duration?
* SK: Picked up f/w update service. So as spec evolves so will work.
* SK: Listed a couple of others...
* AK: Protocol update of Flash w/ progress line. Minor
* TF-M Security Patch Release Proposal
* See WIki
* AK: Walked thru https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/tf_m_security_patch_r…
* DC: Will review this and provide feedback.
* MT: Some wording seems like could be updated, but the intent is fine.
* MT/AK agree on the wording and raise a vote (if required). Will do a "No objection" next meeting
* Discussion about TSC feedback - AP
* Shebu/Matteo/Abhishek/Dan have had syncs. Lots done by Arm teams. A need for something from TSC to discuss. Suggesting to put all roadmaps on the wiki. Frequency TBD (release cycles?)
* Would like 2 weeks notice on technical topic requests.
* Once public roadmap, will make discussions easier.
* TF-M today, next up will be other projects
* Next TF-A, MBed TLS, Hafnium, Trusted Services.
* EF: Date for next meeting?
* AP: Only time to skip is when meetings are not available.
* Team: Agrees this flow is useful and gives good visibility.
* Details can be found _in the comments_ on: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development…
§ Don: Action to Board on TSC needs?
· Shebu: Have TSC reps joined the board to share?
· AP: Will come up w/ questions posed to the board over the next month. September may be the appropriate time to have Board attendance. In TSC, can then formulate and make it more specific.
ACTION: AP come up with a list of topics/questions for the September joint TSC/Board meeting.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - Sent on behalf of the TSC Chair
ST Restricted
Hi,
Please find the minutes from the last call below
Attendees: Don, Abhishek, Anton Komlev <Anton.Komlev(a)arm.com>, Dave Cocca,
David Brown, Shebu, Julius, Andrej Bujok, Eric Finco, Michael Thomas, Kevin
Oerton, Kevin Townsend
Minutes:
-
TF-M release / roadmap update - Shebu
-
See slides
-
1.4.0 - 4 months release cadence
-
Docs deficiencies have been a focus.
-
Need MCU update to Mbed TLS 3.0 - getting support from David Brown.
-
Asure RTOS work within Linaro - a couple of Pull Requests are queued
-
EF: Patches limited to TF-M?
-
SK: In Azure RTOS and Threadx
-
MT: Jump to 3.0 pretty big?
-
MT: Calls only to PSA crypto?
-
SK: Ongoing, uses a mix of legacy and later API’s
-
SK: Community push for clean-ups before migration is completed.
Not a completion point for PSA crypto.
-
SK: A new LTS will happen this quarter
-
Public Roadmap Slide
-
Anton provided overview
-
SK: Looking at profiling to understand context switching overhead
when go from Normal to Secure World
-
Authentication Debug Access Control (ADAC) development being
looked at and how to migrate to TF-M
-
MT: PSA ADAC Spec: Location?
-
SK: In the PSA specification page
-
EF: Concerning F/W Update, some services enhancements in 1.4 -
duration?
-
SK: Picked up f/w update service. So as spec evolves so will
work.
-
SK: Listed a couple of others…
-
AK: Protocol update of Flash w/ progress line. Minor
-
TF-M Security Patch Release Proposal
-
See WIki
-
AK: Walked thru
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/tf_m_security_patch_r…
-
DC: Will review this and provide feedback.
-
MT: Some wording seems like could be updated, but the intent is
fine.
-
MT/AK agree on the wording and raise a vote (if required). Will
do a “No objection” next meeting
-
Discussion about TSC feedback - AP
-
Shebu/Matteo/Abhishek/Dan have had syncs. Lots done by Arm teams.
A need for something from TSC to discuss. Suggesting to put
all roadmaps
on the wiki. Frequency TBD (release cycles?)
-
Would like 2 weeks notice on technical topic requests.
-
Once public roadmap, will make discussions easier.
-
TF-M today, next up will be other projects
-
Next TF-A, MBed TLS, Hafnium, Trusted Services.
-
EF: Date for next meeting?
-
AP: Only time to skip is when meetings are not available.
-
Team: Agrees this flow is useful and gives good visibility.
-
Details can be found _in the comments_ on:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development…
-
Don: Action to Board on TSC needs?
-
Shebu: Have TSC reps joined the board to share?
-
AP: Will come up w/ questions posed to the board over the next
month. September may be the appropriate time to have Board
attendance. In
TSC, can then formulate and make it more specific.
ACTION: AP come up with a list of topics/questions for the September joint
TSC/Board meeting.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - Sent on behalf of the TSC Chair
Thanks Eric. Added that to the agenda.
From: Eric FINCO <eric.finco(a)st.com>
Sent: 13 July 2021 12:56
To: Abhishek Pandit <Abhishek.Pandit(a)arm.com>; tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: RE: TSC Agenda 15 Jul 2021
Hi Abhishek and all,
I suggest the following if you think it is possible:
-Update on TF-M V1.4 content as the code freeze date is approaching
-I noticed the TF-M roadmap on Phabricator was updated 10days ago. Can we go through the changes and get comments ?
Regards,
Eric
[Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: logo_big5]
Eric FINCO | Tel: +33 (0)2 4402 7154
MDG | Technical Specialist
ST Restricted
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Abhishek Pandit via TSC
Sent: mardi 13 juillet 2021 13:13
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 15 Jul 2021
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
On my list at the moment -
* TF-M security patch release.
* TSC feedback. Action items against me.
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
On my list at the moment -
* TF-M security patch release.
* TSC feedback. Action items against me.
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi All,
This is a reminder that the Linaro Connect call for session proposal *deadline
is July 13th*. See details here: https://connect.linaro.org
Connect has historically had a strong representation of TF-related
sessions, so I wanted to encourage all to consider submitting proposals
again for the upcoming Connect (Sept 8-10). It remains a virtual event.
Best regards,
Don
FYI for any of you that missed the CCA event and are interested in watching
the recordings.
Don
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: François Ozog <francois.ozog(a)linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 at 07:53
Subject: Arm/Linaro confidential computing architecture event resources
Hi
The recorded event is available at:
https://connect.linaro.org/resources/arm-cca/
This has been a great event with deep technical content.
A key element is the enablement through the Verifier which allows a third
party to play a trust role between the cloud customer and the cloud
provider. It has been the missing link of all processor vendor proposed
confidential computing technologies I've seen so far. An open governance
project is associated: https://github.com/veraison
Cheers
FF
Hi All,
Please find minutes/actions from last week's TF TSC below.
If any questions or corrections, please let me know.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - sent on behalf of TF TSC Chair
Attendees: Don Harbin, Abhishek Pandit, Kevin Oerton, Dave Cocca, Eric
Finco, Julius Werner, Joakim Bech, Kevin Townsend, Dan Handley, Michael
Thomas(Renesas), David Brown
Action Items:
-
Abhishek: Keep the TSC informed of important decisions made.
-
Abhishek: Check to see if Tech Leads can come in and present plans.
-
Don: Ask the board if they need items from TSC.
-
Abhishek: Discuss with Tech Leads about participating in the TSC and
informing about major changes. Present results at next TSC.
-
Abhishek: Plan bi-annual roadmap discussions and the possibility of
public versions in TSC
-
Abhishek: Add “Phabricator transition planning” as a future TSC agenda
item.
-
*Abhishek*: Create a wiki space for TSC members to provide ideas on what
they would like to see in the TSC meeting.
Minutes:
-
TF-M Patchlist proposal
-
AP: Should this be left for today? About TF-M tightening up the
wording?
-
DC: Sounds OK. It seemed OK, the main issue is that we would like to
tackle the LTS issue - as brought up in the Board meeting.
Understood this
may require additional funding
-
AP: Waiting for TF-M PL team to approve. Once they confirm, Plan to
move forward. Haven’t heard, so I will bring up in the next meeting.
-
TSC Feedback
-
AP: Will create a page for members to comment on. Would like comments
-
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development…
-
TSC decision for returning TF projects to Github
-
DanH: Agree a good idea, but want to continue Gerrit use. May want
to re-look given feedback.
-
JB: Summary - don’t have technical agenda or discussions - taking
place in other forums and 1:1’s. The items are happening in
other places.
Much is around CI and testing, so if not leading Architecture
and testing,
should we change goals of TF?
-
JW: Agree, processes in other meetings. Perhaps accept that and
evaluate the value of this TSC.
-
EF: Mentions iotmint comment he made. We could give it a try and use
meeting for lookahead? Or is open forum a better format? Should these
open forum items be discussed in this TSC?
-
AP: The technical top level SC to have lightweight topics that cross
projects? There are multiple issues that are common and need to be
handled. If push to board, that’s fine. Having more technical topics in
this TSC - a good thing in general, but they need to be
proposed. Between
Dan and Abhishek, they can handle most topics. So how should Technical
proposals come into TSC?
-
EF: Miss a place where we can discuss what we’re thinking. Sometimes
in Open Forums, but not always in the best format. Where topics
come from
- most of the inputs coming from Arm on significant developments.
-
DanH: Some things that Arm can bring to the table, but they are
semi-periodical. After that, for example, we could discuss the
outputs of
CCA event happening next week.
-
AP: IF someone asks for an Arm expert to present, this is
reasonable. But we need to have members proposing desired
topics. Roadmap
is a good round robin topic - need to have tech leads attend. But deeper
technical topics are still unclear. All TSC members can invite outside
people to present. Agenda comes from members
-
DanH: Roadmaps could be a recurring topic.
-
AP: Roadmaps are on a 6 month cadence, so not a monthly thing
-
MT: TF.org handles tf-m and tf-a. TF-M is more self contained
regarding dependencies vs TF-A.
-
AP: Yes, A has multiple projects in the stack
-
MT: For TF-A, is there coordination between the multiple stacks? OP
TEE for example. Are there cross project discussions?
-
JB: Tends to be 1:1 communications. Is this the forum to add others?
-
MT: Is there a benefit to at least present this in TSC?
-
JB: Makes sense to present merged roadmap views.
-
MT: Probably other examples.
-
AP: Purpose of TSC previously discussed and wanted to keep it light.
If multiple methods, discuss in TSC, else don't get involved. Should TSC
steer any decision making?
-
EF: Back to Michaels example on mbedtls - where should this take
place.
-
MT: A summary of changes being made to x or y project, would help.
-
AP: Where should we have these active conversations? In TSC or
elsewhere?
-
MT: Don’t want tech leads to come in regularly, but occasionally not
a bad idea. As SC, to steer at the right time with right information, SC
can provide the input.
-
AP: Can make a draft to suggest how the TSC could get involved at the
suggested level. So Cortex-A discussions every few months?
-
MT: How does it happen now? Decisions made autonomously per project?
-
DanH: Tech Leads for solutions do discuss in Arm, but a case that
some of these discussions could be brought outside of Arm to TSC.
-
AP: Multiple components.
-
DanH; A proposal to look at solutions in TF.org. Step changes may be
required.
-
AP: Action: Have TSC remain informed of important decisions?
-
DC: Also important topics on the table that want SC and Members to
shape the decision. Aligns with Roadmap - as decisions made,
vet with TSC
to meet member objectives.
-
AP: Possibly if TSC is interested in OP TEE, then join OP TEE Tech
Forum. Or discuss in TSC? Two possibilities.
-
DC: Have resource conflicts. TSC must have enough about overall org
to steer.
-
AP: Agree. Shouldn’t just be informed afterwards, but get involved
earlier to “steer” Have discussed MISRA compliance in the past.
-
MT: A roadmap discussion is a good starting point.
-
DC: Key off milestones in roadmaps can determine when a topic should
be discussed.
-
AP: Action: Need to see if Tech Leads can come in and present plans.
-
DanH: Comes back to how a project is driven forward. By Arm? By
others? A roadmap can be lopsided. What is missing is Tech Mgr/Roadmap
owners across all projects. Arm Tech Mgrs may not always be receptive to
requested changes
-
DC: If someone is not participating, then inputs carry less weight.
-
JB: A look at the product today, mainly Arm/Linaro that drives much
of it. OP TEE roadmap is driven from Linaro Members, for
example, so what
does it mean for TF to own a project?
-
AP: There is an opportunity where if someone brings a topic in, then
a different model. A proposal comes to the table. Then discussed.
-
JB: OP TEE - “can I see roadmaps?” “Talking to Linaro” doesn’t seem
like a good answer.
-
AP: OK with roadmaps to be driven from other orgs.
-
AP: 2 Actions:
-
What do we ask Tech leads to inform
-
How to discuss items in advance on roadmap
-
Think Matteo/Shebu post roadmaps, but can ask if don’t
-
JW: Still not sure how affective the TSC can be with external
activities driving things
-
AP: Aligning w/ Eric’s input and take votes to the board.
-
EF: Still see some potential value on what is happening.
-
JW: Could be emails?
-
AP: Could take this to Tech Leads in Arm and get their thoughts on
willingness to discuss work items.
-
DC: worth a try to see if it could add value.
-
JB: Once example if companies presenting Security incidents on their
own pace. Wanted to publish June 24th, Joakim explained and
they pushed to
July 10th
-
DanH: Need to add Phabricator to the future agenda.
-
AP: *Action*: Ask the board if they need items from TSC.
-
DanH: Off line feedback would be OK.
-
AP: May create a Q & A.
<end>
