I test the HAB boot on SPI-Flash on imx7d and get a HAB event as follows, can anyone tell me what it's means?
=> hab_status
Secure boot disabled
HAB Configuration: 0xf0, HAB State: 0x66
--------- HAB Event 1 -----------------
event data:
0xdb 0x00 0x14 0x42 0x33 0x22 0x33 0x00
0x00 0x00 0x00 0x0f 0x00 0x91 0x10 0x00
0x10 0x00 0x00 0x00
STS = HAB_FAILURE (0x33)
RSN = HAB_INV_ADDRESS (0x22)
CTX = HAB_CTX_TARGET (0x33)
ENG = HAB_ENG_ANY (0x00)
Based on the Comment in hab.h, this event logged in hab_rvt.check_target().
Reference to “3.3 Check Target” of “HAB4_API.pdf”:
hab_status_t(* hab_rvt::check_target)(hab_target_t type, const void *start, size_t bytes)
I guess the parameters are: type -> 0x0f, *start -> 0x00911000, bytes -> 0x10000000 ?? Correct??
If it is correct, the size (0x10000000??) seems unreasonable.
Any suggestions?
Solved! Go to Solution.
Hi Bobby,
We have the exact same problem with our i.MX7D, please check my thread https://community.nxp.com/thread/512577 . When I change the load address to DRAM, it works. Right now I don't have access to the CSF but I can say with confidence that the authenticated region length was the same regardless of load address. I will anyway verify my CSF once I get back and then reply to my own thread accordingly.
BR
Matias Larsson
Yes, but it only occurs on boot from SPI-Flash. It works fine on boot from mmc.
Hello,
I've sent You some comments directly.
Regards,
Yuri.
Hi @Yuri , can you please tell me the solution? I have a similar problem on i.MX6UL:
https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/i-MX6UL-Secureboot-SPL-Verification/td-p/1760513
Thanks
Hello,
Length of 0x10000000 bytes means 256 MBytes - this is bigger that size of the OCRAM, but
for DRAM it looks as workable.
Regards,
Yuri.
Hello,
Yes, the size of 0x10000000 is very big for OCRAM.
Have a great day,
Yuri
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
- If this post answers your question, please click the "Mark Correct" button. Thank you!
- We are following threads for 7 weeks after the last post, later replies are ignored
Please open a new thread and refer to the closed one, if you have a related question at a later point in time.
Yes, but why? It looks like the behavior of bootrom. How to debug?