Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Temporary disable Crypto HW accelerator on UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 #10088

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 15, 2019

Conversation

Projects
None yet
@avolinski
Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 13, 2019

Description

Temporary disable work with Crypto HW accelerator on STM32F439xI chipset due to possible issue with it.
Switch to SW only.

Pull request type

[ ] Fix
[ ] Refactor
[ ] Target update
[X] Functionality change
[ ] Docs update
[ ] Test update
[ ] Breaking change

Reviewers

@Patater @netanelgonen @NirSonnenschein

Release Notes

for 5.12rc3

Attached full compliance tests log:

target platform_name test suite result elapsed_time (sec) copy_method
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_attestation-test_a001 OK 28.09 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c001 OK 18.37 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c002 OK 19.38 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c003 OK 19.29 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c004 OK 19.26 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c005 OK 19.26 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c006 OK 20.18 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c007 OK 23.36 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c008 OK 19.31 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c009 OK 19.09 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c010 OK 19.25 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c011 OK 19.38 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c012 OK 19.19 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c013 OK 18.73 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c014 OK 18.98 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c015 OK 18.82 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c016 OK 19.32 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c017 OK 18.98 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c018 OK 18.53 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c019 OK 18.21 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c020 OK 18.91 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c021 OK 18.56 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c022 OK 19.41 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c023 OK 18.78 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c024 OK 19.26 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c025 OK 19.15 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c026 OK 19.04 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c027 OK 18.42 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c028 OK 18.44 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c029 OK 18.83 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c030 OK 19.11 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c031 OK 18.7 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c032 OK 19.78 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c033 OK 19.87 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c034 OK 18.78 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c035 OK 19.72 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c036 OK 19.7 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c037 OK 20.51 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c038 OK 19.12 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c039 OK 19.33 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c040 OK 19.78 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c041 OK 20.49 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c042 OK 21.27 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_crypto-test_c043 OK 21.21 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s001 OK 19.65 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s002 OK 19.88 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s004 OK 19.37 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s005 OK 19.34 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s006 OK 19.09 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s007 OK 19.31 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s008 OK 19.23 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s009 OK 19.38 default
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2-GCC_ARM UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2 components-target_psa-tests-compliance_its-test_s010 OK 19.2 default
mbedgt: test suite results: 53 OK
@Patater

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 13, 2019

Do we know if STM32F439ZI is also affected? Both boards use the same accelerator.

@avolinski

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 13, 2019

Do we know if STM32F439ZI is also affected? Both boards use the same accelerator.

Currently no failures except Odin board were reported.
@NirSonnenschein do we run other STM32F439ZI chipset boards in except Odin CI?

@ciarmcom ciarmcom requested review from netanelgonen, NirSonnenschein, Patater and ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers Mar 13, 2019

@ciarmcom

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 13, 2019

@NirSonnenschein

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 13, 2019

@avolinski here is the list of boards on the nightly job, I'm not sure if any additional ones use the STM32F439ZI chipset :
ARCH_PRO
CY8CKIT_062_WIFI_BT
DISCO_F746NG
DISCO_L475VG_IOT01A
EV_COG_AD3029LZ
EV_COG_AD4050LZ
K22F
K64F
K66F
K66F-ESP8266
K82F
KW24D
KW41Z
NRF51_DK
NRF52_DK
NUCLEO_F072RB
NUCLEO_F207ZG
NUCLEO_F429ZI
NUCLEO_F746ZG
NUCLEO_F767ZI
NUCLEO_L073RZ
UBLOX_EVK_ODIN_W2

@NirSonnenschein

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 13, 2019

This approach seems better than removing PSA support altogether, however we could be causing a performance degradation (possibly a big one) if this functionality is used in non-psa scenarios so there may be a bit of risk involved here as well

@0xc0170 0xc0170 requested review from ARMmbed/team-ublox Mar 13, 2019

@NirSonnenschein

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 14, 2019

starting CI pending reviews

@netanelgonen
Copy link
Contributor

left a comment

What is the reason that we need to disable sha1 and md5 for AES and attestation?

features/mbedtls/targets/TARGET_STM/TARGET_STM32F4/TARGET_STM32F439xI/mbedtls_device.h Outdated

#define MBEDTLS_SHA1_ALT
//#define MBEDTLS_SHA1_ALT

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@Alonof

Alonof Mar 14, 2019

Contributor

@avolinski

  1. Why removing SHA1 & MD5
  2. Why not add a fix to the H/W driver? did you look at the spec maybe its an easy fix

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@avolinski

avolinski Mar 14, 2019

Author Contributor

SHA found to be messing the attestation test when working with accelerator

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@avolinski

avolinski Mar 14, 2019

Author Contributor

until the accelerator issue is settled no taking chances for sporadic possible failures

@LMESTM

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 14, 2019

Before such a PR is proposed, could there be an issue in the first place that describes the problem and how to reproduce it ?

@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 14, 2019

Before such a PR is proposed, could there be an issue in the first place that describes the problem and how to reproduce it ?

Good point, should have tracking issue.

Might be better to remove the lines completely rather to comment them out. Once fixed, the commit would be reverted and they are back.

Removing something needs a reason in the commit msg - why is this being removed. "possible issues" is not sufficient explanation for removal.
Referencing tracking issue in the commit would be nice to have.

@0xc0170
Copy link
Member

left a comment

Comment above ^^

@0xc0170 0xc0170 added needs: work and removed needs: review labels Mar 14, 2019

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 14, 2019

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 13 of 13 test jobs passed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

@avolinski

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 14, 2019

Hi @0xc0170,
Issue created: #10095
Defines are removed entirely from file

@avolinski

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 14, 2019

Please note, apparently this problem was already discovered previously here #6545
and there was a partial workaround merged before into mbedOS #8142

So this is something reoccurring.
@ARMmbed/team-st-mcd

@0xc0170
Copy link
Member

left a comment

One last thing, if you can amend your last commit - add reason why is this being removed (what it's described in the issue) or just reference there the issue

@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 14, 2019

As soon as commit msg is updated, will go into CI

@netanelgonen
Copy link
Contributor

left a comment

Seems this is a good workaround for an old issue

@avolinski avolinski force-pushed the avolinski:master branch Mar 14, 2019

@avolinski avolinski force-pushed the avolinski:master branch to f976ce3 Mar 14, 2019

@avolinski

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 14, 2019

As soon as commit msg is updated, will go into CI

done

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 14, 2019

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 1 of 9 test jobs failed
Build number : 2
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-GCC_ARM
@avolinski

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 14, 2019

looks like Jenkins issue:
https://mbed-os.mbedcloudtesting.com/job/mbed-os-ci_build-GCC_ARM/1885/console

Loading library mbed-os-ci@master
java.io.FileNotFoundException: https://api.github.com/repos/ARMmbed/mbed-os-ci
at com.squareup.okhttp.internal.huc.HttpURLConnectionImpl.getInputStream(HttpURLConnectionImpl.java:243)
at com.squareup.okhttp.internal.huc.DelegatingHttpsURLConnection.getInputStream(DelegatingHttpsURLConnection.java:210)
at com.squareup.okhttp.internal.huc.HttpsURLConnectionImpl.getInputStream(HttpsURLConnectionImpl.java:25)
at org.kohsuke.github.Requester.parse(Requester.java:617)
at org.kohsuke.github.Requester.parse(Requester.java:599)
at org.kohsuke.github.Requester._to(Requester.java:277)
Caused: org.kohsuke.github.GHFileNotFoundException: {
"message": "Server Error"
}

@cmonr cmonr added needs: CI and removed needs: work labels Mar 14, 2019

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 14, 2019

CI restarted

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 14, 2019

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 13 of 13 test jobs passed
Build number : 3
Build artifacts

@cmonr cmonr merged commit 0861709 into ARMmbed:master Mar 15, 2019

28 checks passed

continuous-integration/jenkins/pr-head This commit looks good
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
jenkins-ci/build-ARMC5 Success
Details
jenkins-ci/build-ARMC6 Success
Details
jenkins-ci/build-GCC_ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/build-IAR8 Success
Details
jenkins-ci/cloud-client-test Success
Details
jenkins-ci/dynamic-memory-usage RTOS ROM(+0 bytes) RAM(+52 bytes)
Details
jenkins-ci/exporter Success
Details
jenkins-ci/greentea-test Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-ARMC5 Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-ARMC6 Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-GCC_ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-IAR8 Success
Details
jenkins-ci/unittests Success
Details
travis-ci/astyle Local astyle testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/docs Local docs testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/doxy-spellcheck Local doxy-spellcheck testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/events Passed, runtime is 9190 cycles (-475 cycles)
Details
travis-ci/gitattributestest Local gitattributestest testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/include_check Local include_check testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/licence_check Local licence_check testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/littlefs Passed, code size is 8408B (+0.00%)
Details
travis-ci/psa-autogen Local psa-autogen testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/tools-py2.7 Local tools-py2.7 testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.5 Local tools-py3.5 testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.6 Local tools-py3.6 testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.7 Local tools-py3.7 testing has passed
Details

@cmonr cmonr removed the needs: CI label Mar 15, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.