Re: [PATCH] arm: omap: RX-51: ARM errata 430973 workaround

["Ивайло Димитров" <freemangordon@abv.bg>]

 
Hi,

 >-------- Оригинално писмо --------
 >От:  Pavel Machek 
 >Относно: Re: [PATCH] arm: omap: RX-51: ARM errata 430973 workaround
 >До: Pali Rohár 
 >Изпратено на: Събота, 2013, Март 30 20:36:54 EET
 >
 >
 >Hi!
 >
 >> +u32 rx51_secure_dispatcher(u32 idx, u32 flag, u32 nargs, u32 arg1, u32 arg2,
 >> +			   u32 arg3, u32 arg4)
 >> +{
 >> +	u32 ret;
 >> +	u32 param[5];
 >> +
 >> +	param[0] = nargs+1;
 >> +	param[1] = arg1;
 >> +	param[2] = arg2;
 >> +	param[3] = arg3;
 >> +	param[4] = arg4;
 >> +
 >> +	/*
 >> +	 * Secure API needs physical address
 >> +	 * pointer for the parameters
 >> +	 */
 >> +	flush_cache_all();
 >> +	outer_clean_range(__pa(param), __pa(param + 5));
 >> +	ret = rx51_ppa_smc(idx, flag, __pa(param));
 >> +
 >> +	return ret;
 >> +}
 >
 >You can do without ret variable... Also more detailed changelog would
 >be nice... like what exact problem this works around.
 >

Sure i can, but I don't see a reason to ignore SM's return value. Changelog of what?
 >
 >
 >So... some CPU errata where code sharing virtual addresses could be
 >executed improperly?
 >								
 >> @@ -103,6 +104,12 @@ static void __init rx51_init(void)
 >>  	rx51_peripherals_init();
 >>  	rx51_camera_init();
 >>  
 >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM_ERRATA_430973
 >> +	printk(KERN_INFO "Enabling ARM errata 430973 workaround.\n");
 >> +	/* set IBE to 1 */
 >> +	rx51_secure_update_aux_cr(1 << 6, 0);
 >> +#endif
 >> +
 >
 >Thanks,
 >								Pavel
 >
 >-- 
 >(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
 >(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
 >

I guess if you read the thread over the ML you'll have your questions already answered. 
Or google for "ARM errata 430973 workaround" :).

Regards,
Ivo