[Buildroot] [PATCH v4 6/7] configs/qemu_armv7a_tz_virt: Armv7-A emulation with TrustZone services
Etienne Carriere
etienne.carriere at linaro.org
Mon Feb 18 21:28:10 UTC 2019
Hello all,
On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 19:14, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr> wrote:
>
> Thomas, Etienne, All,
>
> On 2019-02-17 23:12 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 11:47:28 +0100
> > Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere at linaro.org> wrote:
> > > This change introduces a Qemu board for an Armv7-A target executing
> > > with OP-TEE secure world services.
> > I don't know what is the opinion of Peter, Arnout and Yann, but I think
> > this PATCH 6/7 and PATCH 7/7, instead of adding more defconfigs should
> > instead add test cases to our runtime test infrastructure in
> > support/testing/. Indeed:
> >
> > - We probably don't want to have Qemu defconfigs for every possible
> > feature in Buildroot
>
> However, I would not be opposed to having _one_ defconfig that can be
> used as a reference / starting-point.
Is the Qemu emulator the best candidate for such starting point.
I think it is as one can use it to experience Arm specific OP-TEE
package without needing specific HW but a standard Linux host.
I would have preferred proposing a change in the already available
Qemu Armv7 as qemu_arm_vexpress_defconfig is but I fear enabling
TrustZone support in Qemu will break other nice Qemu features ones
are used to (graphics?).
Maybe I can find a real HW for which BR can store a defconfig that
enables OP-TEE.
> > - A runtime test case, even if it's indeed a bit less visible than a
> > defconfig, still documents a configuration that "works" for a given
> > feature.
> > - A runtime test case allows to really runtime test the feature by
> > booting Qemu.
>
> Agreed: adding a runtiem test should indeed be provided, whether we have
> a defconfig or not.
>
>
> Regards,
> Yann E. MORIN.
>
> > Etienne, would you be willing to convert those two configurations to
> > the runtime test infrastructure ?
I think I can prepare that. Or I will ask few help on the ML if I
can't find my way.
The initial intention when adding these defconfig to my patch series was to
answer a request from patch v3 (i think) review where Thomas asked for
something that could b used to check OP-TEE at least builds, if possible boots,
from a BR build. I understand that maybe you though more of such
runtime test, rather than a defconfig.
Regards,
etienne
>
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Thomas
> > --
> > Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
> > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> > https://bootlin.com
>
> --
> .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
> | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
> | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ |
> | +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no |
> | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. |
> '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
More information about the buildroot
mailing list