ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support
cover ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support
Some Exynos-based boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This series adds support for specifying firmware operations, implements some firmware operations for Exynos secure firmware and adds a method of enabling secure firmware operations on Exynos-based boards through board file and device tree.
This is a continuation of the patch series by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109
Tomasz Figa (5):
ARM: EXYNOS: Add IO mapping for non-secure SYSRAM.
ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific
operations
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for secure monitor calls
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support to secondary CPU bring-up
.../devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt | 8 ++++ arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 + arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 6 +++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c | 34 ++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h | 2 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S | 22 +++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h | 3 ++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 8 ++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h | 31 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/map-s5p.h | 1 + 14 files changed, 218 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h
Signature · 1 line
1.7.12
PATCH 1/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add IO mapping for non-secure SYSRAM.
On TrustZone-enabled boards the non-secure SYSRAM is used for secondary CPU bring-up, so add a mapping for it.
--- arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h | 3 +++ arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/map-s5p.h | 1 + 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+)
arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c +34 -0
@@ -214,6 +214,33 @@ static struct map_desc exynos4_iodesc1[] __initdata = { }, }; +static struct map_desc exynos4210_iodesc[]__initdata = { + { + .virtual = (unsigned long )S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS , + .pfn =__phys_to_pfn (EXYNOS4210_PA_SYSRAM_NS ), + .length =SZ_4K , + .type =MT_DEVICE , + }, +}; + +static struct map_desc exynos4x12_iodesc[]__initdata = { + { + .virtual = (unsigned long )S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS , + .pfn =__phys_to_pfn (EXYNOS4x12_PA_SYSRAM_NS), + .length =SZ_4K , + .type =MT_DEVICE , + }, +}; + +static struct map_desc exynos5250_iodesc[]__initdata = { + { + .virtual = (unsigned long )S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS , + .pfn =__phys_to_pfn (EXYNOS5250_PA_SYSRAM_NS ), + .length =SZ_4K , + .type =MT_DEVICE , + }, +}; +static struct map_desc exynos5_iodesc[]__initdata = { { .virtual = (unsigned long )S3C_VA_SYS ,
@@ -321,6 +348,13 @@ static void __init exynos4_map_io(void)else iotable_init (exynos4_iodesc1,ARRAY_SIZE (exynos4_iodesc1)); +if (soc_is_exynos4210 ()) +iotable_init (exynos4210_iodesc,ARRAY_SIZE (exynos4210_iodesc)); +if (soc_is_exynos4212 () ||soc_is_exynos4412 ()) +iotable_init (exynos4x12_iodesc,ARRAY_SIZE (exynos4x12_iodesc)); +if (soc_is_exynos5250 ()) +iotable_init (exynos5250_iodesc,ARRAY_SIZE (exynos5250_iodesc)); +/* initialize device information early */ exynos4_default_sdhci0 ();exynos4_default_sdhci1 ();
arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h +3 -0
@@ -26,6 +26,9 @@#define EXYNOS4_PA_SYSRAM0 0x02025000#define EXYNOS4_PA_SYSRAM1 0x02020000#define EXYNOS5_PA_SYSRAM 0x02020000 +#define EXYNOS4210_PA_SYSRAM_NS 0x0203F000 +#define EXYNOS4x12_PA_SYSRAM_NS 0x0204F000 +#define EXYNOS5250_PA_SYSRAM_NS 0x0204F000#define EXYNOS4_PA_FIMC0 0x11800000#define EXYNOS4_PA_FIMC1 0x11810000
arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/map-s5p.h +1 -0
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@#define S5P_VA_GPIO3 S3C_ADDR(0x02280000)#define S5P_VA_SYSRAM S3C_ADDR(0x02400000) +#define S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS S3C_ADDR(0x02410000)#define S5P_VA_DMC0 S3C_ADDR(0x02440000)#define S5P_VA_DMC1 S3C_ADDR(0x02480000)#define S5P_VA_SROMC S3C_ADDR(0x024C0000)
Signature · 1 line
1.7.12
PATCH 2/5 ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific operations
In reply to Tomasz FigaSome boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This patch adds an interface for platforms to specify available firmware operations and call them.
A wrapper macro, call_firmware_op(), checks if the operation is provided and calls it if so, otherwise returns 0.
By default no operations are provided.
This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607/focus=183988
Example of use:
In code using firmware ops:
__raw_writel(virt_to_phys(exynos4_secondary_startup), CPU1_BOOT_REG); /* Call Exynos specific smc call */ do_firmware_op(cpu_boot, cpu); gic_raise_softirq(cpumask_of(cpu), 1);
In board-/platform-specific code:
static int platformX_do_idle(void)
{
/* tell platformX firmware to enter idle */
return 0;
}
static void platformX_cpu_boot(int i)
{
/* tell platformX firmware to boot CPU i */
}
static const struct firmware_ops platformX_firmware_ops __initdata = {
.do_idle = exynos_do_idle,
.cpu_boot = exynos_cpu_boot,
/* cpu_boot_reg not available on platformX */
};
static void __init board_init_early(void)
{
????????register_firmware_ops(&platformX_firmware_ops);
}--- arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 ++ arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h
arch/arm/common/Makefile +2 -0
@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ # Makefile for the linux kernel. # +obj-y += firmware.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_GIC) += gic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VIC) += vic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ICST) += icst.o
arch/arm/common/firmware.c new file +18 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/suspend.h> + +#include <asm/firmware.h> + +static const struct firmware_ops default_firmware_ops; + +const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops = &default_firmware_ops;
arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +30 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#ifndef __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H +#define __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H + +struct firmware_ops { +int (*do_idle)(void ); +void (*cpu_boot)(int cpu); +void __iomem *(*cpu_boot_reg)(int cpu); +}; + +extern const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops; + +#define call_firmware_op (op, ...) \ + ((firmware_ops->op) ? firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__) : 0) + +static inline void register_firmware_ops (const struct firmware_ops *ops) +{ + firmware_ops = ops; +} + +#endif
Signature · 1 line
1.7.12
PATCH 2/5 ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific operations
Quoted 7 lines · On Thursday 13 of September 2012 10:13:35 Tomasz Figa wrote:
In code using firmware ops:
__raw_writel(virt_to_phys(exynos4_secondary_startup), CPU1_BOOT_REG); /* Call Exynos specific smc call */ do_firmware_op(cpu_boot, cpu);
Typo, s/do_/call_/ .
Best regards,
Signature · 2 lines
Tomasz Figa Samsung Poland R&D Center
PATCH 2/5 ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific operations
In reply to Tomasz FigaQuoted 117 lines · Tomasz Figa
Some boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This patch adds an interface for platforms to specify available firmware operations and call them.
A wrapper macro,
call_firmware_op(), checks if the operation is provided and calls it if so, otherwise returns 0.By default no operations are provided.
This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607/focus=183988Example of use:
In code using firmware ops:
__raw_writel(virt_to_phys(exynos4_secondary_startup), CPU1_BOOT_REG); /* Call Exynos specific smc call */ do_firmware_op(cpu_boot, cpu); gic_raise_softirq(cpumask_of(cpu), 1);In board-/platform-specific code:
static int platformX_do_idle(void) { /* tell platformX firmware to enter idle */ return 0; } static void platformX_cpu_boot(int i) { /* tell platformX firmware to boot CPU i */ } static const struct firmware_ops platformX_firmware_ops __initdata = { .do_idle = exynos_do_idle, .cpu_boot = exynos_cpu_boot, /* cpu_boot_reg not available on platformX */ }; static void __init board_init_early(void) { register_firmware_ops(&platformX_firmware_ops); }Signed-off-by Kyungmin Park <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Tomasz Figa <[email protected]>--- arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 ++ arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.harch/arm/common/Makefile +2
-0@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ # Makefile for the linux kernel. # +obj-y += firmware.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_GIC) += gic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VIC) += vic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ICST) += icst.oarch/arm/common/firmware.c new file +18
-0@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/suspend.h> + +#include <asm/firmware.h> + +static const struct firmware_ops default_firmware_ops; + +const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops = &default_firmware_ops;arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +13
-0@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#ifndef __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H +#define __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H +
arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h line 23
Quoted 10 lines
arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +10
-0+struct firmware_ops { +int (*do_idle)(void ); +void (*cpu_boot)(int cpu); +void __iomem *(*cpu_boot_reg)(int cpu); +}; + +extern const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops; + +#define call_firmware_op (op, ...) \ + ((firmware_ops->op) ? firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__) : 0)
I think this will cause sparse warnings for call_firmware_op(cpu_boot_reg) if there are no ops defined, since the '0' isn't annotated as __iomem. And you can't annotate it since the other function pointers don't need it.
I think you might be better off with stub functions as fallbacks instead of allowing and checking for NULL here.
-Olof
PATCH 2/5 ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific operations
Quoted 134 lines · Olof Johansson
Quoted 118 lines · Tomasz Figa
Some boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This patch adds an interface for platforms to specify available firmware operations and call them.
A wrapper macro,
call_firmware_op(), checks if the operation is provided and calls it if so, otherwise returns 0.By default no operations are provided.
This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607/focus=183988Example of use:
In code using firmware ops:
__raw_writel(virt_to_phys(exynos4_secondary_startup), CPU1_BOOT_REG); /* Call Exynos specific smc call */ do_firmware_op(cpu_boot, cpu); gic_raise_softirq(cpumask_of(cpu), 1);In board-/platform-specific code:
static int platformX_do_idle(void) { /* tell platformX firmware to enter idle */ return 0; } static void platformX_cpu_boot(int i) { /* tell platformX firmware to boot CPU i */ } static const struct firmware_ops platformX_firmware_ops __initdata = { .do_idle = exynos_do_idle, .cpu_boot = exynos_cpu_boot, /* cpu_boot_reg not available on platformX */ }; static void __init board_init_early(void) { register_firmware_ops(&platformX_firmware_ops); }Signed-off-by Kyungmin Park <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Tomasz Figa <[email protected]>--- arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 ++ arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.harch/arm/common/Makefile +2
-0@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ # Makefile for the linux kernel. # +obj-y += firmware.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_GIC) += gic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VIC) += vic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ICST) += icst.oarch/arm/common/firmware.c new file +18
-0@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/suspend.h> + +#include <asm/firmware.h> + +static const struct firmware_ops default_firmware_ops; + +const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops = &default_firmware_ops;arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +13
-0@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#ifndef __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H +#define __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H +arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h line 23
Quoted 10 lines
arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +10
-0+struct firmware_ops { +int (*do_idle)(void ); +void (*cpu_boot)(int cpu); +void __iomem *(*cpu_boot_reg)(int cpu); +}; + +extern const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops; + +#define call_firmware_op (op, ...) \ + ((firmware_ops->op) ? firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__) : 0)I think this will cause sparse warnings for
call_firmware_op(cpu_boot_reg)if there are no ops defined, since the '0' isn't annotated as__iomem. And you can't annotate it since the other function pointers don't need it.
Quoted 2 lines
I think you might be better off with stub functions as fallbacks instead of allowing and checking for NULL here.
do you mean like this?
#Ifdef CONFIG_ARM_FIRMWARE
#define call_firmware_op(op, ...) ((firmware_ops->op) ? firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__) : 0)
#else
#define call_firmware_op(op, ...) do { } while (0) #endif
No problem to modify it.
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
Quoted 9 lines
-Olof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
PATCH 2/5 ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific operations
Quoted 139 lines · Kyungmin Park
Quoted 134 lines · Olof Johansson
Quoted 118 lines · Tomasz Figa
Some boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This patch adds an interface for platforms to specify available firmware operations and call them.
A wrapper macro,
call_firmware_op(), checks if the operation is provided and calls it if so, otherwise returns 0.By default no operations are provided.
This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607/focus=183988Example of use:
In code using firmware ops:
__raw_writel(virt_to_phys(exynos4_secondary_startup), CPU1_BOOT_REG); /* Call Exynos specific smc call */ do_firmware_op(cpu_boot, cpu); gic_raise_softirq(cpumask_of(cpu), 1);In board-/platform-specific code:
static int platformX_do_idle(void) { /* tell platformX firmware to enter idle */ return 0; } static void platformX_cpu_boot(int i) { /* tell platformX firmware to boot CPU i */ } static const struct firmware_ops platformX_firmware_ops __initdata = { .do_idle = exynos_do_idle, .cpu_boot = exynos_cpu_boot, /* cpu_boot_reg not available on platformX */ }; static void __init board_init_early(void) { register_firmware_ops(&platformX_firmware_ops); }Signed-off-by Kyungmin Park <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Tomasz Figa <[email protected]>--- arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 ++ arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.harch/arm/common/Makefile +2
-0@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ # Makefile for the linux kernel. # +obj-y += firmware.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_GIC) += gic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VIC) += vic.o obj-$(CONFIG_ICST) += icst.oarch/arm/common/firmware.c new file +18
-0@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/suspend.h> + +#include <asm/firmware.h> + +static const struct firmware_ops default_firmware_ops; + +const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops = &default_firmware_ops;arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +13
-0@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#ifndef __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H +#define __ASM_ARM_FIRMWARE_H +arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h line 23
Quoted 10 lines
arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +10
-0+struct firmware_ops { +int (*do_idle)(void ); +void (*cpu_boot)(int cpu); +void __iomem *(*cpu_boot_reg)(int cpu); +}; + +extern const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops; + +#define call_firmware_op (op, ...) \ + ((firmware_ops->op) ? firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__) : 0)I think this will cause sparse warnings for
call_firmware_op(cpu_boot_reg)if there are no ops defined, since the '0' isn't annotated as__iomem. And you can't annotate it since the other function pointers don't need it.Quoted 2 lines
I think you might be better off with stub functions as fallbacks instead of allowing and checking for NULL here.
do you mean like this?
Quoted 8 lines
#Ifdef
CONFIG_ARM_FIRMWARE
#definecall_firmware_op(op, ...)((firmware_ops->op) ?firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__): 0)
#else
#definecall_firmware_op(op, ...)do { } while (0) #endifNo problem to modify it.
To get the types and return values right you still need to do something like:
#define call_firmware_op(op, ...) (firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS))
And then, in firmware.c:
static int default_do_idle(void)
{
return 0;
}static default_cpu_boot(int cpu)
{
return;
}static void __iomem *default_cpu_boot_reg(int cpu)
{
return (void __iomem *)0;
}static const struct firmware_ops default_firmware_ops = {
.do_idle = default_do_idle,
.cpu_boot = default_cpu_boot, .cpu_boot_reg = default_cpu_boot_reg,
}
const struct firmware_ops *firmware_ops = &default_firmware_ops;
PATCH 2/5 ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific operations
Hi Olof, Kyungmin,
Quoted 47 lines · On Friday 21 of September 2012 23:23:22 Olof Johansson wrote:
Quoted 15 lines · Kyungmin Park
Quoted 11 lines · Olof Johansson
arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h line 23
Quoted 2 lines · Tomasz Figa
arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h new file +2
-0+#define call_firmware_op (op, ...) \ + ((firmware_ops->op) ? firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__) : 0)I think this will cause sparse warnings for
call_firmware_op(cpu_boot_reg)if there are no ops defined, since the '0' isn't annotated as__iomem. And you can't annotate it since the other function pointers don't need it.I think you might be better off with stub functions as fallbacks instead of allowing and checking for NULL here.
do you mean like this?
Quoted 8 lines
#Ifdef
CONFIG_ARM_FIRMWARE
#definecall_firmware_op(op, ...)((firmware_ops->op) ?firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS__): 0)
#else
#definecall_firmware_op(op, ...)do { } while (0) #endifNo problem to modify it.
To get the types and return values right you still need to do something like:
#define
call_firmware_op(op, ...)(firmware_ops->op(__VA_ARGS))And then, in
firmware.c:static int
default_do_idle(void){ return 0; }static
default_cpu_boot(int cpu){ return; }static void
__iomem*default_cpu_boot_reg(int cpu){ return (void __iomem *)0; }
Quoted 5 lines
static const struct
firmware_opsdefault_firmware_ops= {
.do_idle =default_do_idle,
.cpu_boot =default_cpu_boot, .cpu_boot_reg =default_cpu_boot_reg,
}
Thanks for pointing this out. I will address it in next version of the series.
Also it might be useful to be able to check if an operation was provided, so maybe an unimplemented operation should return an error value (which one would be the most appropriate? -ENOSYS?)? What do you think?
Best regards,
Tomasz Figa
PATCH 2/5 ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific operations
In reply to Olof JohanssonQuoted 4 lines · Olof Johansson
static void
__iomem*default_cpu_boot_reg(int cpu){ return (void __iomem *)0; }
NULL is perfectly acceptable here.
PATCH 3/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for secure monitor calls
In reply to Tomasz FigaSome boards use secure monitor calls to communicate with secure firmware.
This patch adds exynos_smc function which uses smc assembly instruction to do secure monitor calls.
This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109
--- arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 5 +++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 58 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h
arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile +5 -0
@@ -30,6 +30,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS4_MCT) += mct.o obj-$(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) += hotplug.o +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos-smc.o + +plus_sec := $(call as-instr,.arch_extension sec,+sec) +AFLAGS_exynos-smc.o :=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec) + # machine support obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SMDKC210) += mach-smdkv310.o
arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S new file +22 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +/* + * Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. + * + * Copied from omap-smc.S Copyright (C) 2010 Texas Instruments, Inc. + * + * This program is free software,you can redistribute it and/or modify + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as + * published by the Free Software Foundation. + */ + +#include <linux/linkage.h> + +/* + * Function signature: void exynos_smc(u32 cmd, u32 arg1, u32 arg2, u32 arg3) + */ + +ENTRY(exynos_smc) + stmfd sp!, {r4-r11, lr} + dsb + smc #0 + ldmfd sp!, {r4-r11, pc} +ENDPROC(exynos_smc)
arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h new file +31 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +/* +* Copyright (c) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* +* EXYNOS - SMC Call +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#ifndef __ASM_ARCH_EXYNOS_SMC_H +#define __ASM_ARCH_EXYNOS_SMC_H + +#define SMC_CMD_INIT (-1) +#define SMC_CMD_INFO (-2) +/* For Power Management */ +#define SMC_CMD_SLEEP (-3) +#define SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT (-4) +#define SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR (-5) +/* For CP15 Access */ +#define SMC_CMD_C15RESUME (-11) +/* For L2 Cache Access */ +#define SMC_CMD_L2X0CTRL (-21) +#define SMC_CMD_L2X0SETUP1 (-22) +#define SMC_CMD_L2X0SETUP2 (-23) +#define SMC_CMD_L2X0INVALL (-24) +#define SMC_CMD_L2X0DEBUG (-25) + +extern void exynos_smc (u32 cmd,u32 arg1,u32 arg2,u32 arg3); + +#endif
Signature · 1 line
1.7.12
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
In reply to Tomasz FigaSome Exynos-based boards contain secure firmware and must use firmware operations to set up some hardware.
This patch adds firmware operations for Exynos secure firmware and a way for board code and device tree to specify that they must be used.
Example of use:
In board code:
...MACHINE_START(...) /* ... */ .init_early = exynos_firmware_init, /* ... */ MACHINE_END
In device tree:
/ {
/* ... */
firmware {
compatible = "samsung,secure-firmware";
};
/* ... */
};This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109
--- .../devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt | 8 ++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 1 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h | 2 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + 5 files changed, 64 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt +8 -0
@@ -6,3 +6,11 @@ Required root node properties: - compatible = should be one or more of the following. (a) "samsung,smdkv310" - for Samsung's SMDKV310 eval board. (b) "samsung,exynos4210" - for boards based on Exynos4210 SoC. + +Optional: + - firmware node, specifying presence and type of secure firmware, currently + supported value of compatible property is "samsung,secure-firmware": + + firmware { + compatible = "samsung,secure-firmware"; + };
arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS4_MCT) += mct.o obj-$(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) += hotplug.o obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos-smc.o +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += firmware.o plus_sec := $(call as-instr,.arch_extension sec,+sec) AFLAGS_exynos-smc.o :=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h +2 -0
@@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ void exynos4_restart(char mode, const char *cmd);void exynos5_restart (char mode,const char *cmd);void exynos_init_late (void ); +void exynos_firmware_init (void ); +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS int exynos_pm_late_initcall (void );#else
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +52 -0
52 lines not on this page · raw message
arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c +1 -0
@@ -116,6 +116,7 @@ DT_MACHINE_START(EXYNOS4210_DT, "Samsung Exynos4 (Flattened Device Tree)") .init_irq = exynos4_init_irq, .map_io = exynos4_dt_map_io, .handle_irq = gic_handle_irq, + .init_early = exynos_firmware_init, .init_machine = exynos4_dt_machine_init, .init_late = exynos_init_late, .timer = &exynos4_timer,
Signature · 1 line
1.7.12
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
Quoted 115 lines · Tomasz Figa
Some Exynos-based boards contain secure firmware and must use firmware operations to set up some hardware.
This patch adds firmware operations for Exynos secure firmware and a way for board code and device tree to specify that they must be used.
Example of use:
In board code:
...MACHINE_START(...) /* ... */ .init_early = exynos_firmware_init, /* ... */ MACHINE_ENDIn device tree:
/ { /* ... */ firmware { compatible = "samsung,secure-firmware"; }; /* ... */ };This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109Signed-off-by Kyungmin Park <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Tomasz Figa <[email protected]>--- .../devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt | 8 ++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 1 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h | 2 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + 5 files changed, 64 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.cDocumentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt +8
-0@@ -6,3 +6,11 @@ Required root node properties: - compatible = should be one or more of the following. (a) "samsung,smdkv310" - for Samsung's SMDKV310 eval board. (b) "samsung,exynos4210" - for boards based on Exynos4210 SoC. + +Optional: + - firmware node, specifying presence and type of secure firmware, currently + supported value of compatible property is "samsung,secure-firmware": + + firmware { + compatible = "samsung,secure-firmware"; + };arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile +1
-0@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS4_MCT) += mct.o obj-$(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) += hotplug.o obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos-smc.o +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += firmware.o plus_sec := $(call as-instr,.arch_extension sec,+sec) AFLAGS_exynos-smc.o :=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h +2
-0@@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ void exynos4_restart(char mode, const char *cmd);void exynos5_restart (char mode,const char *cmd);void exynos_init_late (void ); +void exynos_firmware_init (void ); +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS int exynos_pm_late_initcall (void );#else arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +25
-0@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +/* +* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics. +* Kyungmin Park <[email protected]> +* Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> +* +* This program is free software,you can redistribute it and/or modify +* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +* published by the Free Software Foundation. +*/ + +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/init.h> +#include <linux/of.h> + +#include <asm/firmware.h> + +#include <mach/map.h> + +#include "smc.h" + +static int exynos_do_idle (void ) +{ +exynos_smc (SMC_CMD_SLEEP ,0 ,0 ,0 ); +return 0 ; +}
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c line 35
Quoted 10 lines
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +10
-0+ +static void exynos_cpu_boot (int cpu) +{ +exynos_smc (SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT , cpu,0 ,0 ); +} + +static void __iomem *exynos_cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) +{ +return S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS +0x1c +4 *cpu; +}
This communication area in sysram should probably be seen as a part of the firmware interface. It should thus be defined as part of the binding instead, i.e. through a reg property or similar there. That also would make it easy to convert to using ioremap() instead of iodesc tables, which always a nice thing.
-Olof
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
Hi Olof,
Quoted 11 lines · On Saturday 15 of September 2012 17:44:55 Olof Johansson wrote:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c line 35
Quoted 4 lines · Tomasz Figa
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +4
-0+static void __iomem *exynos_cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) +{ +return S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS +0x1c +4 *cpu; +}This communication area in sysram should probably be seen as a part of the firmware interface. It should thus be defined as part of the binding instead, i.e. through a reg property or similar there. That also would make it easy to convert to using
ioremap()instead of iodesc tables, which always a nice thing.
The problem with SYSRAM_NS is that it might be also used in other code, not related to firmware only. I don't know exactly all the use cases for it.
Is it really a big problem or we could let it be for now, merge the patches for firmware and then convert SYSRAM_NS to dynamic mapping when its situation clarifies?
Best regards,
Signature · 2 lines
Tomasz Figa Samsung Poland R&D Center
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
Quoted 15 lines · Tomasz Figa
Hi Olof,
Quoted 11 lines · On Saturday 15 of September 2012 17:44:55 Olof Johansson wrote:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c line 35
Quoted 4 lines · Tomasz Figa
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +4
-0+static void __iomem *exynos_cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) +{ +return S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS +0x1c +4 *cpu; +}This communication area in sysram should probably be seen as a part of the firmware interface. It should thus be defined as part of the binding instead, i.e. through a reg property or similar there. That also would make it easy to convert to using
ioremap()instead of iodesc tables, which always a nice thing.
Quoted 2 lines
The problem with
SYSRAM_NSis that it might be also used in other code, not related to firmware only. I don't know exactly all the use cases for it.
If you don't know the use cases, and the use cases are not in the kernel tree that we care about here (upstream), then there's really nothing to worry about. It's after all just a define that's moved to an ioremap, if there's some out of tree code that needs the old legacy define then it can be added in whatever out-of-tree code that uses it. Right?
Quoted 3 lines
Is it really a big problem or we could let it be for now, merge the patches for firmware and then convert
SYSRAM_NSto dynamic mapping when its situation clarifies?
What do you expect is required to clarify the situation, and when do you expect that to happen?
-Olof
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
Quoted 20 lines · Olof Johansson
Quoted 15 lines · Tomasz Figa
Hi Olof,
Quoted 11 lines · On Saturday 15 of September 2012 17:44:55 Olof Johansson wrote:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c line 35
Quoted 4 lines · Tomasz Figa
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +4
-0+static void __iomem *exynos_cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) +{ +return S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS +0x1c +4 *cpu; +}This communication area in sysram should probably be seen as a part of the firmware interface. It should thus be defined as part of the binding instead, i.e. through a reg property or similar there. That also would make it easy to convert to using
ioremap()instead of iodesc tables, which always a nice thing.Quoted 3 lines
The problem with
SYSRAM_NSis that it might be also used in other code, not
related to firmware only. I don't know exactly all the use cases for it.
Quoted 6 lines
If you don't know the use cases, and the use cases are not in the kernel tree that we care about here (upstream), then there's really nothing to worry about. It's after all just a define that's moved to an ioremap, if there's some out of tree code that needs the old legacy define then it can be added in whatever out-of-tree code that uses it. Right?
Now this address is used at cpu boot, cpuidle, inform at this time. As it touched at several places, it's defined at iodesc. if it changed with ioremap, it has to export remaped address and each codes should use it.
As I wrote at cover letter, if you want to use ioremap, it can be modified. however can you merge firmware codes itself? since ioremap is not related with trustzone or firmware issues and it's exynos specific implementation issues. Right?
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Is it really a big problem or we could let it be for now, merge the patches
for firmware and then convertSYSRAM_NSto dynamic mapping when its situation clarifies?What do you expect is required to clarify the situation, and when do you expect that to happen?
-Olof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
Quoted 27 lines · Kyungmin Park
Quoted 20 lines · Olof Johansson
Quoted 15 lines · Tomasz Figa
Hi Olof,
Quoted 11 lines · On Saturday 15 of September 2012 17:44:55 Olof Johansson wrote:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c line 35
Quoted 4 lines · Tomasz Figa
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +4
-0+static void __iomem *exynos_cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) +{ +return S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS +0x1c +4 *cpu; +}This communication area in sysram should probably be seen as a part of the firmware interface. It should thus be defined as part of the binding instead, i.e. through a reg property or similar there. That also would make it easy to convert to using
ioremap()instead of iodesc tables, which always a nice thing.Quoted 3 lines
The problem with
SYSRAM_NSis that it might be also used in other code, not
related to firmware only. I don't know exactly all the use cases for it.Quoted 6 lines
If you don't know the use cases, and the use cases are not in the kernel tree that we care about here (upstream), then there's really nothing to worry about. It's after all just a define that's moved to an ioremap, if there's some out of tree code that needs the old legacy define then it can be added in whatever out-of-tree code that uses it. Right?
Quoted 4 lines
Now this address is used at cpu boot, cpuidle, inform at this time. As it touched at several places, it's defined at iodesc. if it changed with ioremap, it has to export remaped address and each codes should use it.
Won't you have to push down all the references to VA_SYSRAM vs VA_SYSRAM_NS into the firmware interface anyway, since you will need to use different addresses for whether you have firmware enabled or not? I.e. you'll have a "firmware call" at the appropriate level for the non-trustzone cases that uses the equivalent of VA_SYSRAM, and for the trustzone firmware op you'll use VA_SYSRAM_NS?
Quoted 4 lines
As I wrote at cover letter, if you want to use ioremap, it can be modified. however can you merge firmware codes itself? since ioremap is not related with trustzone or firmware issues and it's exynos specific implementation issues. Right?
I'm not quite sure which part you are asking me to merge, if it's the infrastructure pieces or the exynos-specific pieces.
Either way, one isn't really usable without the other, and it doesn't make sense to merge code that can't be used. Infrastructure is best merged together with the first user of it.
-Olof
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
Quoted 37 lines · Olof Johansson
Quoted 30 lines · Kyungmin Park
Quoted 23 lines · Olof Johansson
Quoted 17 lines · Tomasz Figa
Hi Olof,
Quoted 13 lines · On Saturday 15 of September 2012 17:44:55 Olof Johansson wrote:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c line 35
Quoted 4 lines · Tomasz Figa
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +4
-0+static void __iomem *exynos_cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) +{ +return S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS +0x1c +4 *cpu; +}This communication area in sysram should probably be seen as a part of the firmware interface. It should thus be defined as part of the binding
instead, i.e. through a reg property or similar there. That also would
make it easy to convert to usingioremap()instead of iodesc tables, which always a nice thing.Quoted 4 lines
The problem with
SYSRAM_NSis that it might be also used in other code, not
related to firmware only. I don't know exactly all the use cases for it.Quoted 6 lines
If you don't know the use cases, and the use cases are not in the kernel tree that we care about here (upstream), then there's really nothing to worry about. It's after all just a define that's moved to an ioremap, if there's some out of tree code that needs the old legacy define then it can be added in whatever out-of-tree code that uses it. Right?
Quoted 4 lines
Now this address is used at cpu boot, cpuidle, inform at this time. As it touched at several places, it's defined at iodesc. if it changed with ioremap, it has to export remaped address and each codes should use it.
Quoted 6 lines
Won't you have to push down all the references to
VA_SYSRAMvsVA_SYSRAM_NSinto the firmware interface anyway, since you will need to use different addresses for whether you have firmware enabled or not? I.e. you'll have a "firmware call" at the appropriate level for the non-trustzone cases that uses the equivalent ofVA_SYSRAM, and for the trustzone firmware op you'll useVA_SYSRAM_NS?
Right, in case of no firmware, it uses VA_SYSRAM, but VA_SYSRAM_NS is used at firmware case.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 6 lines
As I wrote at cover letter, if you want to use ioremap, it can be modified. however can you merge firmware codes itself? since ioremap is not related with trustzone or firmware issues and it's exynos specific implementation issues. Right?
Quoted 6 lines
I'm not quite sure which part you are asking me to merge, if it's the infrastructure pieces or the exynos-specific pieces.
Either way, one isn't really usable without the other, and it doesn't make sense to merge code that can't be used. Infrastructure is best merged together with the first user of it.
Okay, we will fix it.
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
PATCH 4/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
In reply to Olof JohanssonHi Olof,
Quoted 11 lines · On Saturday 15 of September 2012 17:44:55 Olof Johansson wrote:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c line 35
Quoted 4 lines · Tomasz Figa
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c new file +4
-0+static void __iomem *exynos_cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) +{ +return S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS +0x1c +4 *cpu; +}This communication area in sysram should probably be seen as a part of the firmware interface. It should thus be defined as part of the binding instead, i.e. through a reg property or similar there. That also would make it easy to convert to using
ioremap()instead of iodesc tables, which always a nice thing.
I have tried to get around the need of statical mapping for SYSRAM, but the firmware has to be initialized very early, before low level L2x0 cache initialization (which is an early initcall, so it has to be in init_early machine callback) and at that time ioremap is not available yet.
I think we should just allow this additional static mapping, I don't see any sane way of mapping it dynamically, at least at the moment.
Best regards,
Signature · 2 lines
Tomasz Figa Samsung Poland R&D Center
PATCH 5/5 ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support to secondary CPU bring-up
In reply to Tomasz FigaBoards using secure firmware must use different CPU boot registers and call secure firmware to boot the CPU.
This is a follow-up on the patch by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109
--- arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c +8 -0
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@#include <asm/hardware/gic.h> #include <asm/smp_plat.h> #include <asm/smp_scu.h> +#include <asm/firmware.h> #include <mach/hardware.h> #include <mach/regs-clock.h>
@@ -43,6 +44,9 @@ static inline void __iomem *cpu_boot_reg_base(void)static inline void __iomem *cpu_boot_reg (int cpu) { +void __iomem *fw_boot_reg =call_firmware_op (cpu_boot_reg, cpu); +if (fw_boot_reg) +return fw_boot_reg;if (soc_is_exynos4412 ())return cpu_boot_reg_base () +4 *cpu;return cpu_boot_reg_base ();
@@ -151,6 +155,10 @@ int __cpuinit boot_secondary(unsigned int cpu, struct task_struct *idle)__raw_writel (virt_to_phys (exynos4_secondary_startup),cpu_boot_reg (phys_cpu)); + +/* Call Exynos specific smc call */ +call_firmware_op (cpu_boot, phys_cpu); +gic_raise_softirq (cpumask_of (cpu),1 );if (pen_release ==-1 )
Signature · 1 line
1.7.12
cover ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support
In reply to Tomasz FigaHi,
Quoted 36 lines · On Thursday 13 of September 2012 10:13:33 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Some Exynos-based boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This series adds support for specifying firmware operations, implements some firmware operations for Exynos secure firmware and adds a method of enabling secure firmware operations on Exynos-based boards through board file and device tree.
This is a continuation of the patch series by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109Tomasz Figa (5):
ARM: EXYNOS: Add IO mapping for non-secure SYSRAM.
ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific
operations
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for secure monitor calls
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support to secondary CPU bring-up.../devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt | 8 ++++ arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 + arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 6 +++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c | 34 ++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h | 2 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S | 22 +++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h | 3 ++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 8 ++++
Quoted 8 lines
arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h | 31 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/map-s5p.h | 1 + 14 files changed, 218 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h
Any further comments for this series? Maybe we could merge it for 3.7?
Best regards,
Signature · 2 lines
Tomasz Figa Samsung Poland R&D Center
cover ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support
Quoted 48 lines · Tomasz Figa
Hi,
Quoted 36 lines · On Thursday 13 of September 2012 10:13:33 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Some Exynos-based boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This series adds support for specifying firmware operations, implements some firmware operations for Exynos secure firmware and adds a method of enabling secure firmware operations on Exynos-based boards through board file and device tree.
This is a continuation of the patch series by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109Tomasz Figa (5):
ARM: EXYNOS: Add IO mapping for non-secure SYSRAM.
ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific
operations
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for secure monitor calls
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support to secondary CPU bring-up.../devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt | 8 ++++ arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 + arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 6 +++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c | 34 ++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h | 2 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S | 22 +++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h | 3 ++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 8 ++++Quoted 8 lines
arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h | 31 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/map-s5p.h | 1 + 14 files changed, 218 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h
Quoted 2 lines
Any further comments for this series? Maybe we could merge it for 3.7?
Hi Arnd, Olof,
Can you merge it for 3.7? If exynos implementation still has issues, it's okay only merge firmware implementation.
Can you give your opinions?
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
cover ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support
Quoted 49 lines · Kyungmin Park
Quoted 48 lines · Tomasz Figa
Hi,
Quoted 44 lines · On Thursday 13 of September 2012 10:13:33 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Some Exynos-based boards are running with secure firmware running in TrustZone secure world, which changes the way some things have to be initialized.
This series adds support for specifying firmware operations, implements some firmware operations for Exynos secure firmware and adds a method of enabling secure firmware operations on Exynos-based boards through board file and device tree.
This is a continuation of the patch series by Kyungmin Park:
[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: Make a compile firmware conditionally
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183607
[PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: SMC instruction (aka firmware) support
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/183608/focus=184109Tomasz Figa (5):
ARM: EXYNOS: Add IO mapping for non-secure SYSRAM.
ARM: Add interface for registering and calling firmware-specific
operations
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for secure monitor calls
ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for Exynos secure firmware
ARM: EXYNOS: Add secure firmware support to secondary CPU bring-up.../devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung-boards.txt | 8 ++++ arch/arm/common/Makefile | 2 + arch/arm/common/firmware.c | 18 ++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h | 30 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 6 +++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c | 34 ++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h | 2 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S | 22 +++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h | 3 ++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 8 ++++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h | 31 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/map-s5p.h | 1 + 14 files changed, 218 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/common/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/firmware.h create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos-smc.S create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/smc.h
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Any further comments for this series? Maybe we could merge it for 3.7?
Hi Arnd, Olof,
Can you merge it for 3.7? If exynos implementation still has issues, it's okay only merge firmware implementation.Can you give your opinions?
Hi,
There are still a few open questions to resolve on this before I think it can be merged. And it doesn't make much sense to merge the infrastructure without at least the first user of it.
-Olof