[PATCH] clocksource: arch_timer: Fix code to use physical timers when requested

[cov@codeaurora.org (Christopher Covington)]

On 09/05/2014 06:11 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:35 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
>> Not if you boot Linux at hyp, as we've recommended for this precise
>> reason. That doesn't fix other things like CNTFRQ if the secure
>> initialisation doesn't poke that, however.
> 
> I'll freely admit that I'm out of my league and out of my comfort zone
> here, but...
> 
> In the theory that firmware ought to be as minimal as possible
> (because it's hard to update and hard to keep in sync with kernel
> versions), it seems like firmware ought to start the kernel out in as
> permissive mode as it's willing to provide, right?
> 
> If the kernel is started out as permissive as possible then it can do
> anything it needs to.  Future versions of the kernel can be
> implemented to do any way-cool things that they want to do without an
> update to firmware, right?  ...and current versions of the kernel can
> just shed permissions if they don't want them.
> 
> ...so if I understand correctly, "Secure SVC" mode is more permissive
> than "Non Secure HYP" mode, right?  It looks to me as if we currently
> start the kernel in "Secure SVC" mode.  What do you think about the
> kernel detecting Secure SVC and then dropping down permission levels
> (to Non Secure HYP).  Once it did this, it could update things like
> the virtual offset and then transition down further into non-secure
> SVC mode.
> 
> ...or maybe this has been discussed millions of times already and I'm
> just clueless.  ...or maybe this is just too hard for the kernel to do
> in a generic way?

I think this is a great idea. When running on simulators, it would make (the
non-DTB parts of) the bootwrapper and QEMU's built-in bootloader unnecessary.

Implementing it on AArch64 should be trivial as you can just read CurrentEL
and work from whatever EL/PL you're at. Is there an easy way to check whether
you're in secure or nonsecure mode in AArch32? I seem to recall discussion
about putting this information into the DTB, which makes me think there isn't.

Christopher

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by the Linux Foundation.