From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E6CAE6C60E for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:56:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Hardware Support for Raspberry Pi 4 To: cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org From: d.kauschke154@googlemail.com X-Originating-Location: Planegg, Bavaria, DE (145.253.133.129) X-Originating-Platform: Linux Firefox 131 User-Agent: GROUPS.IO Web Poster MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2024 22:56:22 -0800 References: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <10227.1733208982266769629@lists.cip-project.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="XOc6Em1a6Sh0awEnupi5" List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Tue, 03 Dec 2024 06:56:32 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.cip-project.org/g/cip-dev/message/17322 --XOc6Em1a6Sh0awEnupi5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 03:12 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >=20 > On 27.11.24 22:47, d.kauschke154@googlemail.com wrote: >=20 >> Hi Jan, hi Quirin, >>=20 >> thank you for your detailed informations about the current state for the >> Raspi4. >> It sounds like a good starting point to build upon. >>=20 >> On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 07:48 AM, Quirin Gylstorff wrote: >>=20 >> Hi David, >>=20 >> On 11/27/24 06:28, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>=20 >> Hi David, >>=20 >> On 25.11.24 16:00, d.kauschke154@googlemail.com wrote: >>=20 >> Hello everyone, >>=20 >> I am interested in understanding the current state of >> hardware support >> for the Raspberry Pi 4 within the cip project. >> My goal is to use the Raspberry Pi 4 with secure boot and >> secure update >> mechanisms based on the cip project. >>=20 >> 1)) What progress has been made so far in supporting the >> Raspberry Pi 4 >> hardware in the cip project? >> 2)) How can any remaining gaps or challenges be addressed to >> achieve >> full support? >>=20 >> IIRC, Quirin once had a prototype for that, just not public. He may >> answer best what was need or what would still be missing. >>=20 >> For our internal rpi4 prototype we used the following boot chain: >>=20 >> raspi firmware -> U-Boot -> efibootguard -> CIP kernel -> A/B >>=20 >> I added the following adaptations: >> - Raspi-config for booting U-boot >> - U-boot config for Raspi4 with EFI support >> - Additional bcm2711_defconfig for CIP kernel(6.1.y-cip) >> - wks for RPI4 and A/B rootfs >>=20 >> The rest of the cip stack should then work out of the box. >>=20 >> Quirin >>=20 >>=20 >> Would it be possible to share the Raspi4 prototype publicly? I think >> having access to it would not only help me but also encourage others in >> the community to contribute >> and improve on the work you've started. >>=20 >>=20 >> 3)) What steps or contributions would be most valuable in >> advancing this >> effort? >>=20 >> Baseline would be a booting image with a compatible CIP kernel. From >> there, we would need to see what is missing for SWUpdate and >> Secure Boot >> (both via UEFI). Probably just the integration of a chain-loaded >> recent >> U-Boot as UEFI provider. >>=20 >> But note that no CIP member has so far expressed demand for >> officially >> supporting that hardware and its SoC. So you may have to bring an >> RPi-specific recipe rule to add potentially disabled (and not >> officially >> supported) kernel features via a config snippet. >>=20 >> Jan >>=20 >> Therefore CIP support for the Raspi4 platform is not planned in the >> medium term (next 1-2 years) , correct? >> So a possible starting approach could be to create a public meta-cip- >> raspberrypi4 on Github like the project https://github.com/siemens/meta- >> iot2050 < https://github.com/siemens/meta-iot2050 > ? >=20 > I personally don't see a blocker for providing the required changes also > via isar-cip-core. It's just that we would not commit on that target to > be officially tested and, thus, long-term supported. I understand your point of view. Is there already a way/process to provide platforms via isar-cip-core witho= ut any commitments regarding testing and LTS? >=20 > We can discuss this in the next Technical Steering Committee meeting to > see what other members think. That would be great. >=20 > Jan >=20 > -- > Siemens AG, Technology > Linux Expert Center --XOc6Em1a6Sh0awEnupi5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 03:12 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 27.11.24 22:47, d.kauschke154@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi Jan, hi Quirin,
 
thank you for your detailed= informations about the current state for the
Raspi4.
It sounds l= ike a good starting point to build upon.
 
On Wed, Nov 27, 2= 024 at 07:48 AM, Quirin Gylstorff wrote:

Hi David,

On= 11/27/24 06:28, Jan Kiszka wrote:

Hi David,

On 25.11= .24 16:00, d.kauschke154@googlemail.com wrote:

Hello everyone,
I am interested in understanding the current state of
hardwa= re support
for the Raspberry Pi 4 within the cip project.
My goal= is to use the Raspberry Pi 4 with secure boot and
secure update
= mechanisms based on the cip project.

1)) What progress has been = made so far in supporting the
Raspberry Pi 4
hardware in the cip = project?
2)) How can any remaining gaps or challenges be addressed to<= br />achieve
full support?

IIRC, Quirin once had a prototyp= e for that, just not public. He may
answer best what was need or what = would still be missing.

For our internal rpi4 prototype we used = the following boot chain:

raspi firmware -> U-Boot -> efib= ootguard -> CIP kernel -> A/B

I added the following adapta= tions:
- Raspi-config for booting U-boot
- U-boot config for Rasp= i4 with EFI support
- Additional bcm2711_defconfig for CIP kernel(6.1.= y-cip)
- wks for RPI4 and A/B rootfs

The rest of the cip st= ack should then work out of the box.

Quirin

 Would it be possible to share the Raspi4 prototype publicly? I think
having access to it would not only help me but also encourage others inthe community to contribute
and improve on the work you've started= .
 

3)) What steps or contributions would be most valu= able in
advancing this
effort?

Baseline would be a boo= ting image with a compatible CIP kernel. From
there, we would need to = see what is missing for SWUpdate and
Secure Boot
(both via UEFI).= Probably just the integration of a chain-loaded
recent
U-Boot as= UEFI provider.

But note that no CIP member has so far expressed= demand for
officially
supporting that hardware and its SoC. So y= ou may have to bring an
RPi-specific recipe rule to add potentially di= sabled (and not
officially
supported) kernel features via a confi= g snippet.

Jan

Therefore CIP support for the Raspi4 p= latform is not planned in the
medium term (next 1-2 years) , correct?<= br />So a possible starting approach could be to create a public meta-cip-<= br />raspberrypi4 on Github like the project https://github.com/siemen= s/meta-
iot2050 <https://github.com/siemens/meta-io= t2050> ?
I personally don't see a blocker for providing the required changes alsovia isar-cip-core. It's just that we would not commit on that target to<= br />be officially tested and, thus, long-term supported.
I understand your point of view.
Is there already a way/process to provide platforms via isar-cip-core = without any
commitments regarding testing and LTS?
 

We can discuss this in the next Technical Steering Committee me= eting to
see what other members think.
 
That would be great.

Jan

--
Siemens AG, Technology
Linux Exper= t Center
 
 
--XOc6Em1a6Sh0awEnupi5--