suit: nRF9280 SUIT support #18496

mparpala · 2024-11-04T10:30:46Z

SUIT support for nRF9280

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: 24

Inputs:

Sources:

sdk-nrf: PR head: f3dd4ad3912c1a7d93e49f49f567774d2bed41ff
suit-generator: PR head: 7dd0e0f9baf1877690d4feb345cfaebfddec17f9

more details

sdk-nrf:

PR head: f3dd4ad3912c1a7d93e49f49f567774d2bed41ff
merge base: 5cf5bae9d6db77b2fc91cf9dff462bc644b54456
target head (main): 31d1fa50d22bae9559f3ee06303ca56823a79a3e
Diff

suit-generator:

PR head: 7dd0e0f9baf1877690d4feb345cfaebfddec17f9
merge base: 9bd5f35396bea61f6c8e6aaebc00635364522ce6
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 (35)

cmake
│  ├── sysbuild
│  │  │ suit.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
modules
│  ├── lib
│  │  ├── suit-generator
│  │  │  ├── ncs
│  │  │  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  │  │  ├── basic_kms.py
│  │  │  │  ├── build.py
│  │  │  │  │ encrypt_script.py
│  │  │  ├── suit_generator
│  │  │  │  ├── cmd_image.py
│  │  │  │  │ suit_kms_base.py
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

Outputs:

Toolchain

Version: b77d8c1312
Build docker image: docker-dtr.nordicsemi.no/sw-production/ncs-build:b77d8c1312_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
- ❌ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_lwm2m
- ❌ 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
suit-generator	nrfconnect/suit-generator@`9bd5f35`	nrfconnect/suit-generator@`7dd0e0f` (`ncs`)	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[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 6824[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug[nrf52840gmouse/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_mcuboot_qspi[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
sample.matter.template.debug[nrf5340dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: ROM size increased by 6680[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
sample.matter.template.debug[nrf7002dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: High ROM usage: 911846[B] - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
sample.matter.template.debug[nrf7002dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: ROM size increased by 10400[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_mcuboot_smp[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf5340dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: RAM size increased by 612[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf5340dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: ROM size increased by 4900[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_keyboard.uart[nrf54l15dk/nrf54l15/cpuapp]: ROM size increased by 644[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
applications.sdp.gpio.icbmsg[nrf54l15dk/nrf54l15/cpuflpr]: High ROM usage: 8568[B] - link (cc: @nrfconnect/ncs-ll-ursus)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug.uart[nrf54l15dk/nrf54l15/cpuapp]: ROM size increased by 644[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_keyboard[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_wwcb[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: RAM size increased by 612[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 5008[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_nrf21540ek[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebugwithshell[nrf52840dk/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 556[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf7002dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: High ROM usage: 820678[B] - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf7002dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: RAM size increased by 956[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
sample.matter.template.release[nrf7002dk/nrf5340/cpuapp]: ROM size increased by 8744[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @kkasperczyk-no @ArekBalysNordic @markaj-nordic)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_fast_pair.gmouse.uart[nrf54l15dk/nrf54l15/cpuapp]: ROM size increased by 684[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)
applications.nrf_desktop.zdebug_fast_pair.gmouse[nrf52840gmouse/nrf52840]: ROM size increased by 604[B] in comparison to the main[a07b87c] branch. - link (cc: @MarekPieta)

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the CI (latest/sdk-nrf/PR-18496/12)

subsys/suit/provisioning/CMakeLists.txt

subsys/suit/mci/src/suit_mci_nrf9280.c

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

Remove debug logging lines. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

Fix sizeof calculation for cellular FW manifest. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

Update suit-generator version in order to add support for nRF9280 EngB HSoC1 device. 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 2 times, most recently from 0e91c41 to fc9875d Compare December 16, 2024 12:16

suit: nRF9280 SUIT support

13bb933

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

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

parttimaa added 3 commits December 17, 2024 13:18

suit: Remove debug logging

4a2b80e

Remove debug logging lines. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

suit: Fix sizeof for cell manifest

cff225d

Fix sizeof calculation for cellular FW manifest. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

suit: Update suit-generator version

f3dd4ad

Update suit-generator version in order to add support for nRF9280 EngB HSoC1 device. Signed-off-by: Tuomas Parttimaa <[email protected]>

NordicBuilder removed the DNM label Dec 20, 2024

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

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

		@@ -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

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

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