From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] ARM: add basic support for Trusted Foundations Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:31:36 +0100 Message-ID: <2702565.PHk13m6fVo@flatron> References: <1382956118-12495-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <20131028215649.GB10833@quad.lixom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20131028215649.GB10833-O5ziIzlqnXUVNXGz7ipsyg@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org Cc: Olof Johansson , Kumar Gala , Mark Rutland , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Kevin Hilman , Russell King , Pawel Moll , Arnd Bergmann , Stephen Warren , Tomasz Figa , Ian Campbell , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Rob Herring , Alexandre Courbot , linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Dave Martin List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On Monday 28 of October 2013 14:56:49 Olof Johansson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:57:04AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2013, at 5:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > > > Trusted Foundations is a TrustZone-based secure monitor for ARM that > > > can be invoked using the same SMC-based API on all supported > > > platforms. This patch adds initial basic support for Trusted > > > Foundations using the ARM firmware API. Current features are limited > > > to the ability to boot secondary processors. > > > > > > Note: The API followed by Trusted Foundations does *not* follow the > > > SMC > > > calling conventions. It has nothing to do with PSCI neither and is > > > only > > > relevant to devices that use Trusted Foundations (like most > > > Tegra-based > > > retail devices). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot > > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa > > > Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren > > > --- > > > .../arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundations.txt | 20 ++++++ > > > .../devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt | 1 + > > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 2 + > > > arch/arm/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm/firmware/Kconfig | 28 ++++++++ > > > arch/arm/firmware/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm/firmware/trusted_foundations.c | 79 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/trusted_foundations.h > > > | 67 ++++++++++++++++++ 8 files changed, 199 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundatio > > > ns.txt create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/Kconfig > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/Makefile > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/trusted_foundations.c > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/trusted_foundations.h > > > > > > diff --git > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..2ec75c9 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > > > +Trusted Foundations > > > +------------------- > > > + > > > +Boards that use the Trusted Foundations secure monitor can signal > > > its > > > +presence by declaring a node compatible with > > > "tl,trusted-foundations" > > > +under the /firmware/ node > > > + > > > +Required properties: > > > +- compatible : "tl,trusted-foundations" > > > +- version-major : major version number of Trusted Foundations > > > firmware > > > +- version-minor: minor version number of Trusted Foundations > > > firmware > > > > vendor prefix version. > > Are you saying he should use tl,version-major tl,version-minor? For > bindings that are already vendor-specific we haven't (on ARM) asked for > vendor prefix on properties. It doesn't mean that we should keep going > down that route though, so I'm just asking for clarification for my own > edification. :) This is a good question. We should decide what the right thing (TM) is and write it down. I, on the contrary, was convinced that it's the way Kumar says. Best regards, Tomasz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tomasz.figa@gmail.com (Tomasz Figa) Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:31:36 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v9 1/5] ARM: add basic support for Trusted Foundations In-Reply-To: <20131028215649.GB10833@quad.lixom.net> References: <1382956118-12495-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <20131028215649.GB10833@quad.lixom.net> Message-ID: <2702565.PHk13m6fVo@flatron> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Monday 28 of October 2013 14:56:49 Olof Johansson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:57:04AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2013, at 5:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > > > Trusted Foundations is a TrustZone-based secure monitor for ARM that > > > can be invoked using the same SMC-based API on all supported > > > platforms. This patch adds initial basic support for Trusted > > > Foundations using the ARM firmware API. Current features are limited > > > to the ability to boot secondary processors. > > > > > > Note: The API followed by Trusted Foundations does *not* follow the > > > SMC > > > calling conventions. It has nothing to do with PSCI neither and is > > > only > > > relevant to devices that use Trusted Foundations (like most > > > Tegra-based > > > retail devices). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot > > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa > > > Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren > > > --- > > > .../arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundations.txt | 20 ++++++ > > > .../devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt | 1 + > > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 2 + > > > arch/arm/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm/firmware/Kconfig | 28 ++++++++ > > > arch/arm/firmware/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm/firmware/trusted_foundations.c | 79 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/trusted_foundations.h > > > | 67 ++++++++++++++++++ 8 files changed, 199 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundatio > > > ns.txt create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/Kconfig > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/Makefile > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/trusted_foundations.c > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/trusted_foundations.h > > > > > > diff --git > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..2ec75c9 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > > > +Trusted Foundations > > > +------------------- > > > + > > > +Boards that use the Trusted Foundations secure monitor can signal > > > its > > > +presence by declaring a node compatible with > > > "tl,trusted-foundations" > > > +under the /firmware/ node > > > + > > > +Required properties: > > > +- compatible : "tl,trusted-foundations" > > > +- version-major : major version number of Trusted Foundations > > > firmware > > > +- version-minor: minor version number of Trusted Foundations > > > firmware > > > > vendor prefix version. > > Are you saying he should use tl,version-major tl,version-minor? For > bindings that are already vendor-specific we haven't (on ARM) asked for > vendor prefix on properties. It doesn't mean that we should keep going > down that route though, so I'm just asking for clarification for my own > edification. :) This is a good question. We should decide what the right thing (TM) is and write it down. I, on the contrary, was convinced that it's the way Kumar says. Best regards, Tomasz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757875Ab3J1Xbk (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:31:40 -0400 Received: from mail-ea0-f169.google.com ([209.85.215.169]:33785 "EHLO mail-ea0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757686Ab3J1Xbi (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:31:38 -0400 From: Tomasz Figa To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: Olof Johansson , Kumar Gala , Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Kevin Hilman , Russell King , Pawel Moll , Arnd Bergmann , Stephen Warren , Tomasz Figa , Ian Campbell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Alexandre Courbot , linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] ARM: add basic support for Trusted Foundations Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:31:36 +0100 Message-ID: <2702565.PHk13m6fVo@flatron> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.2 (Linux/3.11.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20131028215649.GB10833@quad.lixom.net> References: <1382956118-12495-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <20131028215649.GB10833@quad.lixom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 28 of October 2013 14:56:49 Olof Johansson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:57:04AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2013, at 5:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > > > Trusted Foundations is a TrustZone-based secure monitor for ARM that > > > can be invoked using the same SMC-based API on all supported > > > platforms. This patch adds initial basic support for Trusted > > > Foundations using the ARM firmware API. Current features are limited > > > to the ability to boot secondary processors. > > > > > > Note: The API followed by Trusted Foundations does *not* follow the > > > SMC > > > calling conventions. It has nothing to do with PSCI neither and is > > > only > > > relevant to devices that use Trusted Foundations (like most > > > Tegra-based > > > retail devices). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot > > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa > > > Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren > > > --- > > > .../arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundations.txt | 20 ++++++ > > > .../devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt | 1 + > > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 2 + > > > arch/arm/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm/firmware/Kconfig | 28 ++++++++ > > > arch/arm/firmware/Makefile | 1 + > > > arch/arm/firmware/trusted_foundations.c | 79 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/trusted_foundations.h > > > | 67 ++++++++++++++++++ 8 files changed, 199 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundatio > > > ns.txt create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/Kconfig > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/Makefile > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/firmware/trusted_foundations.c > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/trusted_foundations.h > > > > > > diff --git > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..2ec75c9 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/tl,trusted-foundat > > > ions.txt @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > > > +Trusted Foundations > > > +------------------- > > > + > > > +Boards that use the Trusted Foundations secure monitor can signal > > > its > > > +presence by declaring a node compatible with > > > "tl,trusted-foundations" > > > +under the /firmware/ node > > > + > > > +Required properties: > > > +- compatible : "tl,trusted-foundations" > > > +- version-major : major version number of Trusted Foundations > > > firmware > > > +- version-minor: minor version number of Trusted Foundations > > > firmware > > > > vendor prefix version. > > Are you saying he should use tl,version-major tl,version-minor? For > bindings that are already vendor-specific we haven't (on ARM) asked for > vendor prefix on properties. It doesn't mean that we should keep going > down that route though, so I'm just asking for clarification for my own > edification. :) This is a good question. We should decide what the right thing (TM) is and write it down. I, on the contrary, was convinced that it's the way Kumar says. Best regards, Tomasz