> OK, this seems to be the crux of the problem. Is it possible for us say that
> users are free to register new TLs, while at the same time recommending the
> use of existing formats for complex structures (e.g. FDT, HOB)?
I'm not really sure what qualifies as a "complex structure" in this
On 12/5/22 10:18 PM, Julius Werner via TF-A wrote:
It seems like some of us still have very different opinions about how
this handoff structure should and shouldn't be used, which I really
think need to be worked out and then codified in the spec before we
can call the document final, because
Jose Marinho ; Simon Glass
> ; Dan Handley
> Cc: t...@lists.trustedfirmware.org; u-boot@lists.denx.de; boot-
> architect...@lists.linaro.org; nd
> Subject: RE: [TF-A] Re: [RFC] Proposed location to host the firmware handoff
> specification.
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the emai
...@lists.trustedfirmware.org; u-boot@lists.denx.de;
boot-architect...@lists.linaro.org; nd
Subject: [TF-A] Re: [RFC] Proposed location to host the firmware handoff
specification.
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
Hi,
We're glad to announce that the Firmware Handoff document sources
ptember 18, 2022 4:05 AM
To: Dan Handley
Cc: t...@lists.trustedfirmware.org; u-boot@lists.denx.de;
boot-architect...@lists.linaro.org; nd
Subject: Re: [TF-A] Re: [RFC] Proposed location to host the firmware handoff
specification.
Hi,
I discussed this with Jose a white bac
Hi,
I discussed this with Jose a white back. I am OK with this as an
interim measure to get the initial doc agreed, so long as we move it
to a more independent place when available.
Regards,
Simon
On Tue, 13 Sept 2022 at 09:48, Dan Handley wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> Just picking up this old
Hi all
Just picking up this old thread again...
There seemed to be general agreement to host the firmware hand-off spec in a
separate repo with separate maintainers at TrustedFirmware.org, at least
initially. Arm intends to progress with the initial population of this repo. We
intend to use
Ilias Apalodimas ;
> Matteo Carlini ; Dan Handley
> ; Harb Abdulhamid
> (h...@amperecomputing.com) ; Samer El-
> Haj-Mahmoud ; nd
> Subject: RE: [RFC] Proposed location to host the firmware handoff
> specification.
>
> Hi,
>
> My concern with a standalone gitl
t-architect...@lists.linaro.org; François Ozog
> ; Manish Pandey2 ;
> Joanna Farley ; Ilias Apalodimas
> ; Matteo Carlini
> ; Dan Handley ; Harb
> Abdulhamid
> (h...@amperecomputing.com) ; Samer El-
> Haj-Mahmoud ; nd
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposed location to host the firmw
as Apalodimas
> ; Matteo Carlini ;
> Dan Handley ; Harb Abdulhamid
> (h...@amperecomputing.com) ; Samer El-
> Haj-Mahmoud ; nd
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposed location to host the firmware handoff
> specification.
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 11:27, Rob H
Hi Rob,
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 11:27, Rob Herring wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 10:37 AM Simon Glass wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> > On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 09:24, Rob Herring wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 3:24 AM Simon Glass wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Jose,
> > > >
> > > > I
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 01:40:11PM +0300, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for pushing on this
>
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 at 12:24, Simon Glass wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jose,
> >
> > I don't think this is correct. TF-A is a project that aims to replace
> > U-Boot SPL (and perhaps other
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 10:37 AM Simon Glass wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 09:24, Rob Herring wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 3:24 AM Simon Glass wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Jose,
> > >
> > > I don't think this is correct. TF-A is a project that aims to replace
> > > U-Boot SPL
Hi Rob,
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 09:24, Rob Herring wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 3:24 AM Simon Glass wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jose,
> >
> > I don't think this is correct. TF-A is a project that aims to replace
> > U-Boot SPL (and perhaps other components) with more closed firmware,
> > e.g. the
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 3:24 AM Simon Glass wrote:
>
> Hi Jose,
>
> I don't think this is correct. TF-A is a project that aims to replace
> U-Boot SPL (and perhaps other components) with more closed firmware,
> e.g. the permissive license.
>
> This spec needs to be in a neutral place, not captive
Hi Simon
A couple of important points:
* TF-A does not aim to replace U-Boot SPL; it aims to reduce fragmentation in
secure firmware. The permissive license may not be ideal but from an OSS PoV,
but it enables much wider adoption than other licensing schemes. But that's
perhaps a philosophical
Hi all,
Thanks for pushing on this
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 at 12:24, Simon Glass wrote:
>
> Hi Jose,
>
> I don't think this is correct. TF-A is a project that aims to replace
> U-Boot SPL (and perhaps other components) with more closed firmware,
> e.g. the permissive license.
>
> This spec needs to
Hi Jose,
I don't think this is correct. TF-A is a project that aims to replace
U-Boot SPL (and perhaps other components) with more closed firmware,
e.g. the permissive license.
This spec needs to be in a neutral place, not captive of one project.
Given its close relationship to device tree, I
18 matches
Mail list logo
