Skip to content

Conversation

@pamaury
Copy link
Contributor

@pamaury pamaury commented Dec 8, 2025

Backport #26169. One commit is not needed because it was backported in #27714. Nevertheless this backport is bit cursed because on master, the dice chain was moved to its file dice_chain.c before this change, whereas on earlgrey_1.0.0 it was moved after. Even after that, the diff still has a conflict because the debug message on earlgrey_1.0.0 is warning: CDI_1 certificate not valid. updating\r\n while it is CDI_1 certificate not valid. updating\r\n on master. Scrolling through the history, I found that #27286 manually cherry-picked #25279 but did not cherry-picked the inclusion of the warning: prefix for some reason. Since this prefix is used by the harness and since all other strings that with either warning: or error:, it makes sense to change the format to include this prefix as well which is what I did.

@pamaury pamaury requested review from a team as code owners December 8, 2025 12:58
@pamaury pamaury requested review from jwnrt and timothytrippel and removed request for a team December 8, 2025 12:58
@pamaury
Copy link
Contributor Author

pamaury commented Dec 8, 2025

The rust harness needed some nontrivial fixes due to the console changes introduces in #28805. I added a commit to make them so that it clear which changes come from this versus the original test.

timothytrippel and others added 3 commits December 8, 2025 17:09
We split the "print_certs" test out into a separate opentitan_binary
target so that it can be reused amongst many tests.

Signed-off-by: Tim Trippel <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit b805ccd)
There are two flavors of ROM_EXT:
1. one that uses X.509 DICE cert encodings, and
2. one that uses CWT DICE cert encodings.

If you run one first, you should be able to run the other later and the
ROM_EXT should seemlessly update the CDI certs. This adds a test to
check this behavior works as intended.

Signed-off-by: Tim Trippel <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 8a2ac65)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants