On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 03:46:03PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> Platform Security Processor (PSP) is part of AMD Secure Processor (AMD-SP),
The Platform...
> PSP is a dedicated processor that provides the support for key management
> commands in a Secure Encrypted Virtualiztion (SEV) mode, along with
Virtualization
Is integrating that spellchecker hard? Because what I do, for example,
is press F7 in vim when I've written the commit message. And F7 is
mapped to:
map <F7> :set spell! spelllang=en_us
spellfile=~/.vim/spellfile.add<CR><Bar>:echo "spellcheck: " . strpart("offon",
3 * &spell, 3)<CR>
in my .vimrc
And I'm pretty sure you can do a similar thing with other editors.
> software-based Trusted Executation Environment (TEE) to enable the
> third-party trusted applications.
>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrc...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <b...@suse.de>
> Cc: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au>
> Cc: Gary Hook <gary.h...@amd.com>
> Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>
> Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: k...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.si...@amd.com>
> ---
> drivers/crypto/ccp/Kconfig | 11 +++++
> drivers/crypto/ccp/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/crypto/ccp/psp-dev.c | 111
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/crypto/ccp/psp-dev.h | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/crypto/ccp/sp-dev.c | 32 +++++++++++++
> drivers/crypto/ccp/sp-dev.h | 27 ++++++++++-
> drivers/crypto/ccp/sp-pci.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++
> 7 files changed, 288 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/crypto/ccp/psp-dev.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/crypto/ccp/psp-dev.h
>
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/ccp/Kconfig b/drivers/crypto/ccp/Kconfig
> index 6d626606b9c5..1d927e13bf31 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/ccp/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/ccp/Kconfig
> @@ -32,3 +32,14 @@ config CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_CRYPTO
> Support for using the cryptographic API with the AMD Cryptographic
> Coprocessor. This module supports offload of SHA and AES algorithms.
> If you choose 'M' here, this module will be called ccp_crypto.
> +
> +config CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
> + bool "Platform Security Processor (PSP) device"
> + default y
> + depends on CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD
So this last symbol CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD is default m and it doesn't depend
on anything. And I'm pretty sure it should depend on CPU_SUP_AMD as this
is AMD-specific hw. You can add that dependency in a prepatch.
And what happened to adding dependencies on CONFIG_KVM_AMD? Or can you
use the PSP without virtualization in any sensible way?
> + help
> + Provide the support for AMD Platform Security Processor (PSP). PSP is
... for the AMD ... The PSP
...
> + a dedicated processor that provides the support for key management
that provides support for
> + commands in in a Secure Encrypted Virtualiztion (SEV) mode, along with
... in Secure Encrypted Virtualization
> + software-based Trusted Executation Environment (TEE) to enable the
> + third-party trusted applications.
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/ccp/Makefile b/drivers/crypto/ccp/Makefile
> index 57f8debfcfb3..008bae7e26ec 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/ccp/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/ccp/Makefile
> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ ccp-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_SP_CCP) += ccp-dev.o \
> ccp-dmaengine.o \
> ccp-debugfs.o
> ccp-$(CONFIG_PCI) += sp-pci.o
> +ccp-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP) += psp-dev.o
>
> obj-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_CRYPTO) += ccp-crypto.o
> ccp-crypto-objs := ccp-crypto-main.o \
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/ccp/psp-dev.c b/drivers/crypto/ccp/psp-dev.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..e60e53272e71
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/ccp/psp-dev.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
> +/*
> + * AMD Platform Security Processor (PSP) interface
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2016-2017 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
> + *
> + * Author: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.si...@amd.com>
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/kthread.h>
> +#include <linux/sched.h>
> +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/spinlock_types.h>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/mutex.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/hw_random.h>
> +#include <linux/ccp.h>
> +
> +#include "sp-dev.h"
> +#include "psp-dev.h"
> +
> +const struct psp_vdata psp_entry = {
> + .offset = 0x10500,
> +};
> +
> +static struct psp_device *psp_alloc_struct(struct sp_device *sp)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = sp->dev;
> + struct psp_device *psp;
> +
> + psp = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*psp), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!psp)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + psp->dev = dev;
> + psp->sp = sp;
> +
> + snprintf(psp->name, sizeof(psp->name), "psp-%u", sp->ord);
> +
> + return psp;
> +}
> +
> +irqreturn_t psp_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
Not static because... ?
> +{
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +
> +int psp_dev_init(struct sp_device *sp)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = sp->dev;
> + struct psp_device *psp;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + psp = psp_alloc_struct(sp);
> + if (!psp)
> + goto e_err;
<---- newline here. I already pointed this out last time. Please be more
careful when incorporating feedback. This is not the first time I'm
writing this. :-\
> + sp->psp_data = psp;
> +
> + psp->vdata = (struct psp_vdata *)sp->dev_vdata->psp_vdata;
> + if (!psp->vdata) {
> + ret = -ENODEV;
> + dev_err(dev, "missing driver data\n");
> + goto e_err;
> + }
> +
> + psp->io_regs = sp->io_map + psp->vdata->offset;
> +
> + /* Disable and clear interrupts until ready */
> + iowrite32(0, psp->io_regs + PSP_P2CMSG_INTEN);
> + iowrite32(-1, psp->io_regs + PSP_P2CMSG_INTSTS);
> +
> + dev_dbg(dev, "requesting an IRQ ...\n");
> + /* Request an irq */
> + ret = sp_request_psp_irq(psp->sp, psp_irq_handler, psp->name, psp);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "psp: unable to allocate an IRQ\n");
> + goto e_err;
> + }
> +
> + sp_set_psp_master(sp);
>From last review:
> So this function is called only once and declared somewhere else. You
> could simply do here:
>
> if (sp->set_psp_master_device)
> sp->set_psp_master_device(sp);
>
> and get rid of one more global function.
and you said:
> Sure I can do that.
> +
> + /* Enable interrupt */
> + dev_dbg(dev, "Enabling interrupts ...\n");
That statement is superfluous...
> + iowrite32(7, psp->io_regs + PSP_P2CMSG_INTEN);
> +
> + dev_notice(dev, "psp enabled\n");
... as this will issue anyway and there are no conditional code paths
in-between.
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +e_err:
> + sp->psp_data = NULL;
> +
> + dev_notice(dev, "psp initialization failed\n");
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +void psp_dev_destroy(struct sp_device *sp)
> +{
> + struct psp_device *psp = sp->psp_data;
> +
> + sp_free_psp_irq(sp, psp);
> +}
So I'm going to stop right here. Please go over
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170907142737.g4aot7xatyopd...@pd.tnic
make sure you've addressed *every* piece of feedback and then send me a
v4.1 for review.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284
(AG Nürnberg)
--
