From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kiszka Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 08:34:38 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 08/14] virt-dt: Allow reservation of secure region when in a RAM carveout In-Reply-To: <20150311151225.GX32541@bill-the-cat> References: <1a57b23ba809626854ceff612d3fed9e19ef5e10.1425884424.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com> <20150311151225.GX32541@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <5501418E.2070506@siemens.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Am 2015-03-11 um 16:12 schrieb Tom Rini: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 08:00:18AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> In this case the secure code lives in RAM, and hence the memory node in >> the device tree needs to be adjusted. This avoids that the OS will map >> and possibly access the reservation. >> >> Add support for setting CONFIG_ARMV7_SECURE_RESERVE_SIZE to carve out >> such a region. We only support cutting off memory from the beginning or >> the end of a RAM bank as we do not want to increase their number (which >> would happen if punching a hole) for simplicity reasons >> >> This will be used in a subsequent patch for Jetson-TK1. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka >> --- >> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/virt-dt.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > My concern here is that this looks a lot like things we would re-use on > armv8 and we're making them potentially needlessly v7-centric. If > nothing else, the function names should be generic and this be the v7 > implementation of them, yes? I didn't look into v8's needs and state yet, so I cannot comment on this. But my feeling is that renaming is only relevant if we expect PSCI code that invokes this to be shared by both. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux