From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: digetx@gmail.com (Dmitry Osipenko) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:49:39 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 1/9] ARM: enable secure platform-only erratas In-Reply-To: <20171219232810.GI10595@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> References: <77ce738c15b992a92bee3a18e5468342fb2dc5ab.1500510157.git.mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl> <20171219232810.GI10595@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> Message-ID: <21964ae9-4c60-36b2-627d-04e4e975a38d@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 20.12.2017 02:28, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 09:16:12PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> On 20.07.2017 03:29, Micha? Miros?aw wrote: >>> Allow secure-only erratas to be used in multiarch kernel. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Micha? Miros?aw >>> --- >>> arch/arm/Kconfig | 20 ++++++++++++++------ >>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig >>> index a208bfe367b5..a1eff866550b 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig >>> +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig >>> @@ -696,6 +696,14 @@ config ARCH_MULTI_CPU_AUTO >>> >>> endmenu >>> >>> +config ARCH_ASSUME_SECURE_PLATFORM >>> + bool "Enable ERRATAs using secure-only registers" >>> + default !ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM >> >> I think default should always be "Yes" and this option shouldn't affect >> multiplatform kernels. So a multiplatform kernel wouldn't be an option >> for your device. > > No, that changes the current behaviour. > > Current behaviour is for the secure-only errata to be disabled when the > multi-platform option is enabled, because multi-platform kernels have to > be able to run in the non-secure world. Defaulting this option to "yes" > means that these errata become visible. Indeed, I got it inverted. > I have to wonder why you need this though - your patches seem to be > targetting a platform that runs in non-secure world, and enabling these > errata would make the kernel non-bootable on your platform. Perhaps because Micha? made the Tegra's CPU reset handler hardcoded to either secure or to non-secure case based on the kernels configuration. I've showed how we can get rid of that inflexibility in [0], maybe Micha? could pick up the idea in the next iteration of the patches. [0] https://marc.info/?l=linux-tegra&m=151371042522835