suit: nRF9280 SUIT support #18496

mparpala · 2024-11-04T10:30:46Z

Add SUIT support for nRF9280 EngB product.

CLAassistant · 2024-11-04T10:30:52Z

All committers have signed the CLA.

NordicBuilder · 2024-11-04T10:32:35Z

CI Information

^{To view the history of this post, clich the 'edited' button above}
Build number: 32

Inputs:

Sources:

sdk-nrf: PR head: 2e091634fba8fd8c5955ede8e90e96eea753a508
zephyr: PR head: 2c7f6efa7220ef2fbdd70e8597aedf1a07e86067

more details

sdk-nrf:

PR head: 2e091634fba8fd8c5955ede8e90e96eea753a508
merge base: 24f8ed39996138636281c702a226664ce1a5e312
target head (main): 296fa39d3256542decafb1cd53d0f50beda2b5d9
Diff

zephyr:

PR head: 2c7f6efa7220ef2fbdd70e8597aedf1a07e86067
merge base: 9761d261943a916443cf6c748ee3daa2915e3546
Diff

Github labels

Enabled	Name	Description
	ci-disabled	Disable the ci execution
	ci-all-test	Run all of ci, no test spec filtering will be done
	ci-force-downstream	Force execution of downstream even if twister fails
	ci-run-twister	Force run twister
	ci-run-zephyr-twister	Force run zephyr twister

List of changed files detected by CI (43)

cmake
│  ├── sysbuild
│  │  ├── suit.cmake
│  │  ├── suit_provisioning.cmake
│  │  │ suit_provisioning_nrf9280.cmake
config
│  ├── suit
│  │  ├── templates
│  │  │  ├── nrf9280
│  │  │  │  ├── default
│  │  │  │  │  ├── v1
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── app_envelope.yaml.jinja2
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── app_recovery_envelope_app_local.yaml.jinja2
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── app_recovery_envelope_direct.yaml.jinja2
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── app_recovery_local_envelope.yaml.jinja2
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── rad_envelope.yaml.jinja2
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── rad_recovery_envelope.yaml.jinja2
│  │  │  │  │  │  │ root_with_binary_nordic_top.yaml.jinja2
subsys
│  ├── nrf_security
│  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  ├── src
│  │  │  ├── drivers
│  │  │  │  ├── cracen
│  │  │  │  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  │  │  │  │ psa_driver.Kconfig
│  ├── suit
│  │  ├── mci
│  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │ suit_mci_nrf9280.c
│  │  ├── memory_layout
│  │  │  │ Kconfig
│  │  ├── metadata
│  │  │  ├── include
│  │  │  │  │ suit_metadata.h
│  │  ├── platform
│  │  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  │  ├── sdfw
│  │  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │  │ suit_plat_check_image_match_sdfw_specific.c
│  │  ├── storage
│  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │ suit_storage_nrf9280.c
│  │  ├── stream
│  │  │  │ Kconfig
│  │  ├── validator
│  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │ suit_validator_nrf9280.c
sysbuild
│  ├── Kconfig.suit_provisioning
│  ├── suit_provisioning
│  │  ├── Kconfig.nrf9280
│  │  │ nrf9280.cmake
west.yml
zephyr
│  ├── boards
│  │  ├── nordic
│  │  │  ├── nrf54h20dk
│  │  │  │  ├── support
│  │  │  │  │  ├── nrf54h20_cpuapp.JLinkScript
│  │  │  │  │  │ nrf54h20_cpurad.JLinkScript
│  │  │  ├── nrf9280pdk
│  │  │  │  ├── support
│  │  │  │  │  ├── nrf9280_cpuapp.JLinkScript
│  │  │  │  │  │ nrf9280_cpurad.JLinkScript
│  ├── drivers
│  │  ├── pinctrl
│  │  │  │ pinctrl_nrf.c
│  ├── include
│  │  ├── zephyr
│  │  │  ├── drivers
│  │  │  │  ├── clock_control
│  │  │  │  │  │ nrf_clock_control.h
│  │  │  ├── dt-bindings
│  │  │  │  ├── pinctrl
│  │  │  │  │  │ nrf-pinctrl.h
│  ├── tests
│  │  ├── drivers
│  │  │  ├── mspi
│  │  │  │  ├── api
│  │  │  │  │  ├── boards
│  │  │  │  │  │  │ nrf54l15dk_nrf54l15_cpuapp.overlay
│  │  │  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │  │  │ main.c
│  │  │  ├── uart
│  │  │  │  ├── uart_async_api
│  │  │  │  │  ├── boards
│  │  │  │  │  │  │ nrf54h20dk_nrf54h20_cpuppr.overlay
│  │  │  │  │  ├── sysbuild
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── vpr_launcher
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── boards
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ nrf54h20dk_nrf54h20_cpuapp.overlay
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ prj.conf

Outputs:

Toolchain

Version: 11349092be
Build docker image: docker-dtr.nordicsemi.no/sw-production/ncs-build:11349092be_912848a074

Test Spec & Results: ✅ Success; ❌ Failure; 🟠 Queued; 🟡 Progress; ◻️ Skipped; ⚠️ Quarantine

◻️ Toolchain - Skipped: existing toolchain is used
✅ Build twister
❌ Integration tests
- ✅ test-sdk-audio
- ✅ desktop52_verification
- ❌ test-fw-nrfconnect-boot
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-apps
- ❌ test_ble_nrf_config
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_mesh
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_samples
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-chip
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nfc
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_libmodem-nrf
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_serial_lte_modem
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_zephyr_lwm2m
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_samples
- ✅ doc-internal
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_thingy91
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf_crypto
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-rpc
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-rs
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-fem
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-tfm
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-thread
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-zigbee
- ✅ test-sdk-find-my
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_mosh
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_positioning
- ✅ test-sdk-sidewalk
- ✅ test-sdk-wifi
- ✅ test-low-level
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_nrf_provisioning
- ✅ test-sdk-pmic-samples
- ✅ test-sdk-mcuboot
- ✅ test-sdk-dfu
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-ps
- ✅ test-secdom-samples-public
- ⚠️ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_cloud
- ⚠️ test-sdk-dfu

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the CI

nordicjm

2 comments are optional, rest are required

nordicjm · 2024-11-04T10:33:56Z

subsys/suit/mci/Kconfig

@@ -20,6 +20,11 @@ config SUIT_MCI_IMPL_NRF54H20_SDFW
 	bool "nRF54H20: Secure domain"
 	depends on SUIT_PLATFORM_VARIANT_SDFW


needs nrf54h20 guard

I'd not agree here. We have cases, where we use the 54 implementation on POSIX to run tests.

depends on <nrf54h20> || <posix>?

And actually tests should not need this because they should force config e.g. https://github.com/nrfconnect/sdk-nrf/blob/main/tests/lib/modem_info/CMakeLists.txt there is a similar thing for network tests

subsys/suit/memory_layout/Kconfig

subsys/suit/provisioning/CMakeLists.txt

subsys/suit/provisioning/Kconfig

subsys/suit/provisioning/soc/Kconfig.nrf9280

nordicjm · 2024-11-04T10:36:29Z

subsys/suit/provisioning/soc/Kconfig.nrf9280

+# WARNING:
+#  All addresses and sizes in this file must be sunchronized with the SUIT storage address
+#  defined in the Device Tree.
+#  Any modification of those values require alignment in the SDFW.
+#  Contents of the MPI (vendor name, class name, policies) may be modified by the
+#  product vendor.


get the values from devicetree then? Why are there kconfigs duplicating what already exists

The storage address is read from devicetree, so you may cross-out the addresses from the warning message (it used to be hard-coded here).
There is a minor duplication, but this is solely due to the fact that SDFW-specific device-tree files are not accessible from NCS applications (you cannot even build for cpusec).

The current state is:

the SUIT storage address is encoded as reserved area in sdk-nrf

the reserved area is compared with SDFW definitions though static asserts

the storage partitioning/layout is documented and only at the domain-level visible in SDFW dts files (so other SDFW components can implement per-domain firewalls).

all offsets visible in this file are necessary to generate the output artifacts. They are also hard-coded in other places (storage implementation, suit generator), but since changing those break the compatibility, they should be constant for a given board for a lifetime (see engb/engc migration to realize how hard that is). There is no point to make it configurable at user level. There is also no point to make all offset values depending on the Kconfigs, because: SDFW does not even generate MPI, suit-generator may be used in other contexts than sdk-nrf app build.

NordicBuilder · 2024-11-04T10:47:44Z

You can find the documentation preview for this PR at this link. It will be updated about 10 minutes after the documentation build succeeds.

Note: This comment is automatically posted by the Documentation Publishing GitHub Action.

NordicBuilder · 2024-11-04T11:02:34Z

The following west manifest projects have changed revision in this Pull Request:

Name	Old Revision	New Revision	Diff
zephyr	nrfconnect/sdk-zephyr@`9761d26`	nrfconnect/sdk-zephyr@`2c7f6ef` (`main`)	nrfconnect/[email protected]

✅ All manifest checks OK

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the Manifest GitHub Action.

subsys/suit/provisioning/soc/Kconfig.nrf9280

subsys/suit/stream/Kconfig

subsys/suit/storage/src/suit_storage_nrf9280.c

subsys/suit/mci/src/suit_mci_nrf9280.c

NordicBuilder · 2024-11-27T11:31:03Z

You can find the documentation preview for this PR at this link. It will be updated about 10 minutes after the documentation build succeeds.

Note: This comment is automatically posted by the Documentation Publish GitHub Action.

NordicBuilder · 2024-12-10T11:14:53Z

Memory footprint analysis revealed the following potential issues

sample.matter.template.debug[nrf7002dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: High ROM usage: 911938[B] - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf7002dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: High ROM usage: 820770[B] - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the CI (latest/sdk-nrf/PR-18496/32)

subsys/suit/provisioning/CMakeLists.txt

subsys/suit/mci/src/suit_mci_nrf9280.c

config/suit/templates/nrf9280/default/v1/app_recovery_envelope_direct.yaml.jinja2

west.yml

Add SUIT support for nRF9280 EngB product. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

Update to latest sdk-zephyr. Revert Kconfig file due to compliancy fail. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

Add SUIT dependency to platform keys config in order to keep support for no SUIT build variant of nRF9280. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

mparpala added the DNM label Nov 4, 2024

mparpala requested review from a team as code owners November 4, 2024 10:30

github-actions bot added the changelog-entry-required Update changelog before merge. Remove label if entry is not needed or already added. label Nov 4, 2024

nordicjm requested changes Nov 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

mparpala requested a review from a team as a code owner November 4, 2024 11:02

github-actions bot added the manifest label Nov 4, 2024

NordicBuilder added the manifest-suit-generator label Nov 4, 2024

tomchy requested changes Nov 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

anttik-nordic requested a review from a team as a code owner November 18, 2024 14:12

parttimaa force-pushed the nrf9280_suit branch 2 times, most recently from ce5733a to 5625d67 Compare November 27, 2024 11:05

tomchy reviewed Dec 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

subsys/suit/provisioning/CMakeLists.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

tomchy reviewed Dec 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

subsys/suit/mci/src/suit_mci_nrf9280.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

subsys/suit/mci/src/suit_mci_nrf9280.c Show resolved Hide resolved

ahasztag requested changes Dec 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

subsys/suit/mci/src/suit_mci_nrf9280.c Show resolved Hide resolved

parttimaa force-pushed the nrf9280_suit branch 3 times, most recently from 57e182a to 13bb933 Compare December 16, 2024 12:58

NordicBuilder removed the DNM label Dec 20, 2024

tomchy reviewed Jan 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

config/suit/templates/nrf9280/default/v1/app_recovery_envelope_direct.yaml.jinja2 Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

parttimaa force-pushed the nrf9280_suit branch from f3dd4ad to 1643daf Compare January 2, 2025 11:31

tomchy approved these changes Jan 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

ahasztag requested changes Jan 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

west.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

github-actions bot removed the manifest label Jan 3, 2025

NordicBuilder removed the manifest-suit-generator label Jan 3, 2025

parttimaa force-pushed the nrf9280_suit branch from fc4dd63 to 7f276c1 Compare January 3, 2025 10:08

github-actions bot added the manifest label Jan 3, 2025

NordicBuilder added the manifest-suit-generator label Jan 3, 2025

parttimaa force-pushed the nrf9280_suit branch from 7f276c1 to 63692db Compare January 9, 2025 07:41

github-actions bot removed the manifest label Jan 9, 2025

NordicBuilder removed the manifest-suit-generator label Jan 9, 2025

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support

3658d2e

Add SUIT support for nRF9280 EngB product. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

parttimaa force-pushed the nrf9280_suit branch from 63692db to 3658d2e Compare January 13, 2025 09:50

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support

fb50640

Update to latest sdk-zephyr. Revert Kconfig file due to compliancy fail. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

github-actions bot added the manifest label Jan 13, 2025

NordicBuilder added the manifest-zephyr label Jan 13, 2025

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support

2e09163

Add SUIT dependency to platform keys config in order to keep support for no SUIT build variant of nRF9280. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support #18496

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support #18496

mparpala commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited by parttimaa

Loading

CLAassistant commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

nordicjm left a comment

nordicjm Nov 4, 2024

tomchy Nov 5, 2024

nordicjm Nov 5, 2024

nordicjm Nov 5, 2024

nordicjm Nov 4, 2024

tomchy Nov 5, 2024

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NordicBuilder commented Nov 27, 2024

NordicBuilder commented Dec 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

This comment was marked as resolved.

		@@ -20,6 +20,11 @@ config SUIT_MCI_IMPL_NRF54H20_SDFW
		bool "nRF54H20: Secure domain"
		depends on SUIT_PLATFORM_VARIANT_SDFW

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support #18496

Are you sure you want to change the base?

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support #18496

Conversation

mparpala commented Nov 4, 2024 • edited by parttimaa Loading

CLAassistant commented Nov 4, 2024 • edited Loading

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024 • edited Loading

CI Information

Inputs:

Sources:

Github labels

Outputs:

Toolchain

Test Spec & Results: ✅ Success; ❌ Failure; 🟠 Queued; 🟡 Progress; ◻️ Skipped; ⚠️ Quarantine

nordicjm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nordicjm Nov 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tomchy Nov 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nordicjm Nov 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nordicjm Nov 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nordicjm Nov 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tomchy Nov 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024 • edited Loading

NordicBuilder commented Nov 27, 2024

NordicBuilder commented Dec 10, 2024 • edited Loading

Memory footprint analysis revealed the following potential issues

This comment was marked as resolved.

mparpala commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited by parttimaa

Loading

CLAassistant commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NordicBuilder commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NordicBuilder commented Dec 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading