boot-architecture

boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org

646 discussions

by François Ozog

Attendees François-Frédéric Ozog (Linaro) Frank Rowand Simon Glass (Google) Ilias Apalodimas (Linaro) Atish Patra (Western Digital) Mark Brown (Arm) Heinrich Schuchardt CVS Arnd Bergmann Rob Herring (Arm) Loic Pallardy (ST) Poonam (NXP) Ruchika Loic Pallardy (ST) Don Harbin(linaro) Presentation SLIDE 2 Francois: if we want authentication, we can’t do fix up Simon: what is fix up? Can’t change DT or ok to change it? Francois: can orchestrate transition, [edit as typing notes: changing is not OK because you can’t identify the scope of change; adding a new node may be acceptable - because scope is easy to frame] Simon: code doing the fixup is signed , so it may be a signal that the changes are OK; don’t know how to pass that to Linux. In principle you should rely on signed code to make changes Francois: [rephrasing at note editing] two trust models 1) implicit - trust because generating/updating code is signed 2) explicit - trust because you can check signature of the DT Heinrich: if the DT comes from file system, it should be signed; for DT embedded in signed code: no need to have a signature; signature for things from file but not from memory [at writing notes, I understand this as a DT fragment generated by FT-A in memory does not need to be signed] SLIDE 3 Francois: cold-plug by U-Boot, hotplug by OS Francois: Board DTB + cape DTBo + cape_on_board DTBo (pin muxing config, irq config…) Frank: Device removal triggers DT correspond node(s) removal? If so, then we should limiting a single device per overlay Francois: yes. It is also connected to device assignment. There should be a way to identify all nodes of a device in DT to actually simplify device assignment (to be discussed later in the deck) SLIDE 4 Lets use a special config DTBo (chosen…) Let’s get the parameters out of DT in local OS config (or worst case, in that config DTBo) Rob: problem with systems with loadable modules Arnd: can be passed on command line Rob: Greg KH say: don’t add module parameters Arnd: device specific parameters should be done via sysfs/ioctl; driver wide parameters could be as module parameters or boot command line Frank or it could be a “chosen” [editig time] Francois: for Linux, can we organize module parameters in modules.d are parsed when modules are statically linked? Let’s not use DT when we can avoid (OP-TEE bus to discover TAs) SLIDE 5 Francois: wherever we choose, we shall ensure backward compatibility SLIDE 6 DTB=base board + 1 DTBo per device Statically merge DTB + DTBos at compile time and keep metadata about the merge in a section of the new DT file format. SLIDE 7 Arnd/Simon: Right now the Android boot loader merges DTB/DTBos and passes one DTB to the kernel Simon: ChromeOS has a FIT image with multiple DTs, it selects one to pass to OS Arnd/Ilias: FIT is only understood by U-Boot Francois: wherever we choose, we shall ensure backward compatibility Arnd: It’s simpler to have a single DTB for the kernel Early kernel is not really powerful There are security advantages in signed DTBos Francois: I think the key question is decide on a model. Allow bootloaders to change the DTB and rely on signed DTBos? Simon: is either or ? [explicit vs implicit trust models], what is the threat model? Francois: yes, I think so. Heinrich: problem is wrong voltage in DT results in destroying the board Arnd: steal sensitive data Ilias: DoS can become a problem Ilias: signing per device (key mgmt complexity) ? or per device model (can compromise all devices of a model)? Francois: Who signs what is also a fundamental concept, because there might be different signing authorities Loic: That’s the current case wit ST devices Arnd: There’s 3 options here: Kernel with embedded DTB, if the kernel signature is checked, the DTB does not need to be checked The bootloader loads the kernel from a disk Nothing is checked Checking one of those makes no sense Simon: we have to be careful in not tying ourselves in a knot. There is *no* bidirectional root of trust. The model is that trust is built starting from the root of trust, the next level implicitly trusts the level that loaded it. Mark Brown: DT is used with EDK2 Loic: there is no direct boot from U-Boot to kernel, it is vouched by OP-TEE. security of co-processors requires the same model Hardware firewall (device and memory) can be leveraged to ensure full security DTE Project information portal: https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/DTE/DTE+Progress+Updates Security presentation: (listed in the portal, but copied here for simple access): https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CvKBBZ33ggzyhP2ub8iZ410I_KGrFjHftZL…

5 years

DTE call this wednesday

by François Ozog

Hi, I think we have gathered enough knowledge in the Technical Report to try architecting DT evolution technologies. To that end, I'll kick start discussion with: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1jACxdO-3fDzSk5MEMUEmAu0iMjtp9Td7Xbb… Everyone has commenter capabilities in the document, so please use it. I am sure most of the proposals cannot be "decided on" during the call. But I'd like to come to a conclusion on one topic: whether or not fix ups are allowed. If we introduce signature of any form with DTB, then I believe fixups are not possible anymore. Cheers -- FF

5 years

2020-07-20 System DT call notes and action items

by Nathalie Chan King Choy

Hi all, The notes from today's call can be found on the OpenAMP Wiki at https://github.com/OpenAMP/open-amp/wiki/System-DT-Meeting-Notes-2020#2020J… The action items are: * Stefano to share slides * Xilinx and ST to discuss interconnect binding, considering that it could be expanded beyond QoS, and review Rob's earlier feedback to Benjamin on pin control * Stefano to check if configuration interface assumes that IDs are global * Stefano to work with Bruce to prototype something w/ Lopper to generate a bus firewall configuration table * Stefano to present openamp-remoteproc binding for System DT at next call @ Stefano, Loic, Rob, Ilias, Tomas (and anyone else who spoke, if I missed you): Please check if there are any errors or important omissions in what I captured for your parts. You can make corrections directly in the wiki page. Thanks & regards, Nathalie C. Chan King Choy Program Manager focused on Open Source and Community

5 years

System Device Tree call - July

by Nathalie Chan King Choy

[Invitation going out to both the sytem-dt list and the boot-architecture list, based on recommendation from Francois] Hi all, It has been a while since our last call, because work was happening on the 4th action item below. Now, there are some updates to present. The notes from the previous call can be found on the OpenAMP wiki at this link: https://github.com/OpenAMP/open-amp/wiki/System-DT-Meeting-Notes-2020 Action items from the previous call: * Nathalie sync up w/ Francois about who should be invited to System DT call (some individuals at DTE call didn't get this invitation) * Stefano to go back & discuss w/ Xilinx XMPU expert. * Stefano: Revisit wording of IDs * Stefano & Tomas to sync-up with Loic & Benjamin. Target for next System DT call to discuss how the 2 proposals combine. Include description of the use cases you're giving solution for. For info about the system-dt list, link to the archives, to unsubscribe yourself, or for someone to subscribe themselves, visit: https://lists.openampproject.org/mailman/listinfo/system-dt For information about the System Device Trees effort, including a link to the intro presentation from Linaro Connect SAN19: https://github.com/OpenAMP/open-amp/wiki/System-Device-Trees Best regards, Nathalie C. Chan King Choy Program Manager focused on Open Source and Community =================== Nathalie Chan King Choy is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Topic: System DT call - July Time: Jul 20, 2020 08:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89143577824 Meeting ID: 891 4357 7824 One tap mobile +13126266799,,89143577824# US (Chicago) +13462487799,,89143577824# US (Houston) Dial by your location +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose) +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown) +1 587 328 1099 Canada +1 647 374 4685 Canada +1 647 558 0588 Canada +1 778 907 2071 Canada +1 204 272 7920 Canada +1 438 809 7799 Canada +44 203 051 2874 United Kingdom +44 203 481 5237 United Kingdom +44 203 481 5240 United Kingdom +44 203 901 7895 United Kingdom +44 131 460 1196 United Kingdom +33 1 7037 9729 France +33 1 7095 0103 France +33 1 7095 0350 France +33 1 8699 5831 France +33 1 7037 2246 France +46 8 5050 0828 Sweden +46 8 5050 0829 Sweden +46 8 5052 0017 Sweden +46 850 539 728 Sweden +46 8 4468 2488 Sweden +46 8 5016 3827 Sweden Meeting ID: 891 4357 7824 Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/k6bFgrs5K

5 years

Meeting notes from DTE June 24

by François Ozog

Hi, Here are the notes from our last meeting. (For next calls, it would be nice people take some notes in the shared scratch document so that we increase quality of them) Attendees Tom Rini Joakim Bech (Linaro) François-Frédéric Ozog (Linaro) Ilias Apalodimas (Linaro) Mark Brown (Arm) Heinrich Schuchardt Priyanka Jain (NXP) Jens Wiklander (Linaro) Arnd Bergmann CVS Atish Patra (Western Digital) Grant Likely (Arm) Etienne Carriere (ST) ==================================== I - RISC-V Atish from Western Digital has a 4 developer team on. Focus on standardized boot flows: - U-Boot SPL + U-Boot. - coreBoot + EDK2 ==================================== II - Technical report github Atul volunteered FF: What format to use ? RST? MD? Other? Heinrich: RST and MD are rendered by github. ==================================== III - Technical report outline and content updates A proposal to be made so that a minimal UEFI set of requirements is defined with DT support. Frank: Should not put DT spec in the UEFI forum FF: this is not the goal, the goal is to get references to DT in UEFI Need to ensure we have terminology that can be applied to all architectures (for instance Arm+TFA+U-Boot and RISC-V+U-Boot SPL+U-Boot). Please make proposals for content including new sections for the use cases. ==================================== IV- Overlays presentation Franks Presentation notes: https://elinux.org/Frank%27s_Evolving_Overlay_Thoughts https://elinux.org/images/0/03/Elce_2018_dt_bof.pdf https://elinux.org/Device_Tree_Reference -> OverLays Overlay made simple with DTC extensions: use a reference to define the place in the tree where the update is to be made: &{/path/to/node} { <overlay definition> } Use cases: Hot swap Expansion slots (beaglebone) FPGAs (load from kernel to FPGA; led by Altera/Xilinx) Not too dynamic, in particular because there are still memory leaks Use of “apply overlay by the bootload” helps reducing the number of DTS/DTB files to deal with. plugable CPU: overlay is a solution few terms to define/standardise/clarify by frank: Cold-swap = ? < describe the actual use-case in simple terms > Hot-swap = ? < describe the actual use-case in simple terms > Real hot-swap will be difficult to support. Another use case for “hot-swap” is a developer helper to change parameter “dynamically” to avoid a full reboot. FF: DT event may be a wrong way to deal with dynamism: using bus events to trigger changes seem more natural Grant: event code is fragile, prefer pre-boot control

5 years, 1 month

June 24th call

by François Ozog

Hi, I have updated the document to reflect what I heard from the remainder of the last call. Please have a look and comment. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CLkhLRaz_zcCq44DLGmPZQFPbYHOC6nzPowaL0X… If you volunteer to edit content, please ask me and I'll give you edit rights on the document. Shall we make a github backed document? If so, any volunteer to make it happen? Agenda for June 24th: - DT Overlay status presentation by Frank Rowand. - Document review and trying to close all comments. Cordially -- FF

5 years, 1 month

[RFC] SMC yielding Trusted OS call discrepancies

by François Ozog

Hi, Trusted OSes such as OP-TEE or QSEE are using SMC yielding function numbers in the 0x32000000-0x3200006F range. The SMC calling conventions are specified in DEN0028 which has currently three versions (see below). To the best of my understanding, the use of this range is: - compliant with version a - acceptable with version b - somewhat contradicting with version c version a analysis: table 6.1 states that the trusted OS standard calls should be in the range "0x02000000-0x7FFFFFFF", so the selected range is good. Section 2.1 that defines a bit structure for function numbers for both yielding and fast calls and the range is compatible. The range covered by table 6.1 for Trusted OS calls is however much bigger that the bit structure definition. As a result a 0x02000000 call is a yielding Trusted OS call as per table 6.1 but a Yielding SiP call as per section 2.1. version b analysis: table 6.2 states that the trusted OS yielding calls should be in the range "0x02000000-0x1FFFFFFF" and that the range "0x20000000-0x7FFFFFFF" is "reserved for future expansion of Trusted OS Yielding Calls". So the range is acceptable but poorly selected. There is the same inconsistency as version a when it comes to qualifying a 0x02000000 call: table 6.2 says it is a Trusted OS yielding call, section 2.5 says it is a yielding SiP call. version c analysis: section 2.5.1 now clearly states that the bit structure is only for Fast calls. and both section 2.52 and table 6.2 state that Trusted OS calls should be in the range "0x02000000-0x1FFFFFFF". both section 2.5.2 and 6 qualify the 0x02000000 call as a Trusted OS yielding call. I think that version a and b have inconsistent between chapter 2 and 6. Version c brings internal consistency but seems to be not in alignment with best practices. I guess there is a need to both address internal document inconsistency and better reflect existing products. Any thoughts? -FF version a: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OclQZk0o28n5ZUIYeTuFICbLiGWzOvxH/view?usp=… version b: https://static.docs.arm.com/den0028/b/ARM_DEN0028B_SMC_Calling_Convention.p… version c: https://static.docs.arm.com/den0028/c/Q1-ARM-DEN-0028_SMC_Calling_Conventio…

5 years, 1 month

DTE: PCIe memory mappings

by Heinrich Schuchardt

Hello Francois, in our last meeting you suggested to investigate deeper what meaning modularization in device trees could mean. One example I have seen is the definition of memory mappings for PCIe. If for you example you look in the device tree of the Raspberry Pi 4 you can find that there is an entry: pcie@7d500000 { ranges = < 0x2000000 0x00 0xf8000000 0x06 0x00 0x00 0x4000000>; }; The ranges property defines the mapping MEM 0x600000000..0x603ffffff -> 0xf8000000 and thereby the address and size of the memory windows used for communication. On some boards e.g. the MacchitoBin you have multiple platform devices each with its own ranges definitions. Here are the values in May 2019: pcie@f2600000 { ranges = < 0x81000000 0x0 0xf9000000 0x0 0xf9000000 0x0 0x10000 0x82000000 0x0 0xf6000000 0x0 0xf6000000 0x0 0xf00000>; } pcie@f2620000 { ranges = < 0x81000000 0x0 0xf9010000 0x0 0xf9010000 0x0 0x10000 0x82000000 0x0 0xf7000000 0x0 0xf7000000 0x0 0xf00000>; } pcie@f2640000 { ranges = < 0x81000000 0x0 0xf9020000 0x0 0xf9020000 0x0 0x10000 0x82000000 0x0 0xf8000000 0x0 0xf8000000 0x0 0xf00000>; } On my MacchitoBin the GPU card was not usable because the memory window was too small to create the required BARs. Changing the window size and location solved the problem, commit d3446b266a8c ("arm64: dts: marvell: mcbin: enlarge PCI memory window"). The problem with the current way in qhich PCI devices are declared is that they do not indicate requirements and capabilities and let the software figure out a good mapping. But instead fixed mappings are hard-coded into the device-tree. So for me this would be one element of DT modularization: The description of a device should provide capabilities and requirements and avoid fixed software settings. Best regards Heinrich

5 years, 1 month

[PATCH] Editorial fixups to devicetree requirements

by Grant Likely

Address comments from Heinrich Schuchardt: - Typo fixes - Be specific to say "Devicetree Blob" - Add comment on rationale for choosing EfiACPIReclaimMemory for DTB Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk(a)gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely(a)arm.com> --- source/chapter2-uefi.rst | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/source/chapter2-uefi.rst b/source/chapter2-uefi.rst index c9c0101..066fefb 100644 --- a/source/chapter2-uefi.rst +++ b/source/chapter2-uefi.rst @@ -81,9 +81,9 @@ A UEFI system that complies with this specification may provide the additional tables via the EFI Configuration Table. Compliant systems are required to provide one, but not both, of the following -tables. +tables: -- An Advanced Configuration and Power Interface [ACPI]_ table, or +- an Advanced Configuration and Power Interface [ACPI]_ table, or - a Devicetree [DTSPEC]_ system description EBBR systems must not provide both ACPI and Devicetree @@ -96,11 +96,13 @@ Devicetree ^^^^^^^^^^ If firmware provides a Devicetree system description then it must be provided -in Flattened Devicetree (DTB) format version 17 or higher as described in +in Flattened Devicetree Blob (DTB) format version 17 or higher as described in [DTSPEC]_ § 5.1. The following GUID must be used in the EFI system table ([UEFI]_ § 4) to identify the DTB. The DTB must be contained in memory of type EfiACPIReclaimMemory. +EfiACPIReclaimMemory was chosen to match the recommendation for ACPI +tables which fulfill the same task as the DTB. .. code-block:: c -- 2.20.1

5 years, 2 months

EBBR v1.0.1-rc1

by Grant Likely

I'd like to do a point release of EBBR in the near future. There is an important change to how RuntimeServicesSupported is described in the UEFI spec that needs to be adjusted in EBBR, and the DTB UUID was missing. The rest of the changes are minor editorial and typo fixes. I've tagged v1.0.1-rc1 in github for review. Full diff is below. Please review and comment. Thanks, g. --- .travis.yml | 82 +++++++++++++++++------------------------ CONTRIBUTING.rst | 23 +----------- source/chapter2-uefi.rst | 40 +++++++++++++++++--- source/chapter3-secureworld.rst | 6 +-- source/index.rst | 3 ++ source/references.rst | 10 ++--- 6 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 83 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml index 3688a67..4a63cb0 100644 --- a/.travis.yml +++ b/.travis.yml @@ -1,63 +1,49 @@ sudo: false dist: trusty - cache: apt: true - env: global: - - SPHINXBUILD=~/.local/bin/sphinx-build - - DIFF_COMMIT=v0.5 - + - SPHINXBUILD=~/.local/bin/sphinx-build + - secure: 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 git: depth: false - addons: apt: packages: - - python-pip - - latexmk - - libalgorithm-diff-perl - - texlive - - texlive-latex-extra - - texlive-humanities - - texlive-generic-recommended - - graphviz - - texlive-generic-extra - + - python-pip + - latexmk + - libalgorithm-diff-perl + - texlive + - texlive-latex-extra + - texlive-humanities + - texlive-generic-recommended + - graphviz + - texlive-generic-extra install: - - pip install --user mako - - pip install --user Sphinx - -before_script: - - wget https://github.com/ftilmann/latexdiff/releases/download/1.2.1/latexdiff-1.2… - - tar xvf latexdiff-1.2.1.tar.gz - - export PATH=$PWD/latexdiff-1.2.1/:$PATH - +- pip install --user mako +- pip install --user Sphinx script: - - make latexpdf - - make html - - make singlehtml - +- make latexpdf +- make html +- make singlehtml before_deploy: - - cp build/latex/ebbr.pdf build/ebbr-$TRAVIS_TAG.pdf - +- cp build/latex/ebbr.pdf build/ebbr-$TRAVIS_TAG.pdf deploy: - - provider: releases - prerelease: true - api_key: - secure: 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 - file_glob: true - file: - - "build/ebbr-*.pdf" - skip_cleanup: true - on: - tags: true - branch: master - - provider: pages - github_token: $GITHUB_TOKEN - local_dir: "build/singlehtml" - skip_cleanup: true - on: - branch: master - +- provider: releases + prerelease: true + api_key: + secure: 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 + file_glob: true + file: + - build/ebbr-*.pdf + skip_cleanup: true + on: + tags: true + branch: master +- provider: pages + github_token: "$GITHUB_TOKEN" + local_dir: build/singlehtml + skip_cleanup: true + on: + branch: master diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.rst b/CONTRIBUTING.rst index a5643a3..7021f0f 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTING.rst +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.rst @@ -8,35 +8,14 @@ Anyone may contribute to the EBBR project. Contributions are licensed under CC-BY-SA-4.0_ and must be made with a Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO_) attestation as described below. -EBBR discussion uses the boot-architecture_ and arm.ebbr-discuss mailing lists. -The 'official' list is arm.ebbr-discuss, but the list archives are not -yet public, so boot-architecture_ is being used to keep everything in -the open. +EBBR discussion uses the boot-architecture_ mailing list. * boot-architecture(a)lists.linaro.org -* arm.ebbr-discuss(a)arm.com Past discussions can be found in the boot-architecture-archive_. We use the IRC channel `#ebbr`_ on OFTC_. -There is a bi-weekly conference call to discuss EBBR topics on the 2nd -and 4th Tuesday of the month at 15:00 UTC/BST, 7:00 PST/PDT, 23:00/22:00 CST -(following UTC/BST daylight savings time shifts). -Anyone is welcome to join. - -- Online meeting: https://arm-onsite.webex.com/meet/gralik01 -- Phone - - - 1-408-792-6300 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) - - 1-877-668-4490 Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada) - - 44-203-478-5285 Call-in toll number (UK) - - 08-002061177 Call-in toll-free (UK) - - More access numbers: webex-global-numbers_ -- Access code: 809 053 990 - -.. _webex-global-numbers: https://arm-onsite.webex.com/cmp3300/webcomponents/widget/globalcallin/glob… - DCO Attestation --------------- diff --git a/source/chapter2-uefi.rst b/source/chapter2-uefi.rst index f6a5802..c9c0101 100644 --- a/source/chapter2-uefi.rst +++ b/source/chapter2-uefi.rst @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ platforms. UEFI Version ============ -This document uses version 2.7 of the UEFI specification [UEFI]_. +This document uses version 2.8 Errata A of the UEFI specification [UEFI]_. UEFI Compliance =============== @@ -86,12 +86,41 @@ tables. - An Advanced Configuration and Power Interface [ACPI]_ table, or - a Devicetree [DTSPEC]_ system description -As stated above, EBBR systems must not provide both ACPI and Devicetree +EBBR systems must not provide both ACPI and Devicetree tables at the same time. Systems that support both interfaces must provide a configuration mechanism to select either ACPI or Devicetree, and must ensure only the selected interface is provided to the OS loader. +Devicetree +^^^^^^^^^^ + +If firmware provides a Devicetree system description then it must be provided +in Flattened Devicetree (DTB) format version 17 or higher as described in +[DTSPEC]_ § 5.1. +The following GUID must be used in the EFI system table ([UEFI]_ § 4) +to identify the DTB. +The DTB must be contained in memory of type EfiACPIReclaimMemory. + +.. code-block:: c + + #define EFI_DTB_GUID \ + EFI_GUID(0xb1b621d5, 0xf19c, 0x41a5, \ + 0x83, 0x0b, 0xd9, 0x15, 0x2c, 0x69, 0xaa, 0xe0) + +Firmware must have the DTB resident in memory and installed in the EFI system table +before executing any UEFI applications or drivers that are not part of the system +firmware image. +Once the DTB is installed as a configuration table, +the system firmware must not make any modification to it or reference any data +contained within the DTB. + +UEFI applications are permitted to modify or replace the loaded DTB. +System firmware must not depend on any data contained within the DTB. +If system firmware makes use of a DTB for its own configuration, +it should use a separate private copy that is not installed in the +EFI System Table or otherwise be exposed to EFI applications. + UEFI Secure Boot (Optional) --------------------------- @@ -111,7 +140,7 @@ during both boot services and runtime services. However, it isn't always practical for all EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES functions to be callable during runtime services due to hardware limitations. If any EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES functions are only available during boot services -then firmware shall provide the global `RuntimeServicesSupported` variable to +then firmware shall provide the `EFI_RT_PROPERTIES_TABLE` to indicate which functions are available during runtime services. Functions that are not available during runtime services shall return EFI_UNSUPPORTED. @@ -148,7 +177,7 @@ Firmware shall not create runtime mappings, or perform any runtime IO that will conflict with device access by the OS. Normally this means a device may be controlled by firmware, or controlled by the OS, but not both. -e.g. If firmware attempts to access an eMMC device at runtime then it will +E.g. if firmware attempts to access an eMMC device at runtime then it will conflict with transactions being performed by the OS. Devices that are provided to the OS (i.e., via PCIe discovery or ACPI/DT @@ -202,7 +231,8 @@ If a platform does not implement modifying non-volatile variables with SetVariable() after ExitBootServices(), then firmware shall return EFI_UNSUPPORTED for any call to SetVariable(), and must advertise that SetVariable() isn't available during runtime services -via the `RuntimeServicesSupported` variable as defined in UEFI version 2.8. +via the `RuntimeServicesSupported` value in the `EFI_RT_PROPERTIES_TABLE` +as defined in [UEFI]_ § 4.6. EFI applications can read `RuntimeServicesSupported` to determine if calls to SetVariable() need to be performed before calling ExitBootServices(). diff --git a/source/chapter3-secureworld.rst b/source/chapter3-secureworld.rst index 4e9fa61..9c51bca 100644 --- a/source/chapter3-secureworld.rst +++ b/source/chapter3-secureworld.rst @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ .. SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 -****************************** -Priviledged or Secure Firmware -****************************** +***************************** +Privileged or Secure Firmware +***************************** AArch32 Multiprocessor Startup Protocol ======================================= diff --git a/source/index.rst b/source/index.rst index 9bc4a09..7a5ded9 100644 --- a/source/index.rst +++ b/source/index.rst @@ -45,6 +45,9 @@ Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. 31 March 2019 1.0 - Remove unnecessary UEFI requirements appendix - Allow for ACPI vendor id in firmware path + 1 June 2020 1.0.1-rc1 - Update to UEFI 2.8 Errata A + - Specify UUID for passing DTB + - Typo and editorial fixes ================= ========= ============================================= .. toctree:: diff --git a/source/references.rst b/source/references.rst index a12c1a2..1eb0509 100644 --- a/source/references.rst +++ b/source/references.rst @@ -8,8 +8,8 @@ <https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/releases/tag/v0.2>`_, `Devicetree.org <https://devicetree.org>`_ -.. [LINUXA64BOOT] `Linux Documentation/arm64/booting.txt - <https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tre…>`_, +.. [LINUXA64BOOT] `Linux Documentation/arm64/booting.rst + <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/arm64/booting.html>`_, Linux kernel .. [PSCI] `Power State Coordination Interface Issue C (PSCI v1.0) @@ -20,6 +20,6 @@ <https://static.docs.arm.com/den0044/b/DEN0044B_Server_Base_Boot_Requirement…>`_ 8 March 2016, `Arm Limited <http://arm.com>`_ -.. [UEFI] `Unified Extensable Firmware Interface Specification v2.7A - <http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI%20Spec%202_7_A%20Sep…>`_, - August 2017, `UEFI Forum <http://www.uefi.org>`_ +.. [UEFI] `Unified Extensable Firmware Interface Specification v2.8 Errata A + <https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Spec_2_8_A_Feb14.pdf>`_, + February 2020, `UEFI Forum <http://www.uefi.org>`_

5 years, 2 months

← Newer
1
...
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
...
65
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

boot-architecture