On 06/10/2013 03:14 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 05:11:15PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> I think we need to separate the concept of support for *a* secure
> monitor, from support for a *particula
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 05:05:04PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:13 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> > One way to make the backend generic would be to have something like
> > one of the following (some syntax omitted due to laziness):
> >
> > u32 __naked __call_smc(u32
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 05:11:15PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >>> I think we need to separate the concept of support for *a* secure
> >>> monitor, from support for a *particular* secure monitor.
> >>
> >> Agreed. In this case, can we a
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 05:11:15PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >>> I think we need to separate the concept of support for *a* secure
> >>> monitor, from support for a *particular* secure monitor.
> >>
> >> Agreed. In this case, can we a
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:47:22PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> One could remove the naked attribute and put there registers into the
> clobber list, but then the function will be inlined and we will have
> to ensure the parameters end up in the right register (and having a
> function that can
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> I think we need to separate the concept of support for *a* secure
>>> monitor, from support for a *particular* secure monitor.
>>
>> Agreed. In this case, can we assume that support for a specific secure
>> monitor is not arch-specific, and
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:13 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> One way to make the backend generic would be to have something like
> one of the following (some syntax omitted due to laziness):
>
> u32 __naked __call_smc(u32 r0, ...)
> {
> asm volatile (
>
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> Most likely it's either unnecessary, or insufficient.
>
> Just for entering call SMC properly, it's not needed. If the Secure
> World has its MMU on and maps Normal World memory using the same memory
> types as Linux, then the Normal World and
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 06:03:54PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> >> I think we need to separate the concept of support for *a* secure
> >> monitor, from support for a *particular* secure monitor.
> >
> > There is no fixed set of functionalit
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 12:29:14PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/06/2013 12:08 PM, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 10:44:48AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 06/06/2013 01:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> >>> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 04:25:07PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Dave Martin wrote:
>
> >> +static int __attribute__((used)) __tegra_smc_stack[10];
> >
> > Use __used instead of using GCC attributes directly.
> >
> >> +
> >> +/*
> >> + * With EABI, subtype and
On 06/07/2013 02:11 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 06/06/2013 01:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>>> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
>>> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to so
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
>> I think we need to separate the concept of support for *a* secure
>> monitor, from support for a *particular* secure monitor.
>
> There is no fixed set of functionality implemented by these interfaces,
> so it might be better to think in terms
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Jassi Brar wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Alexandre Courbot
>> wrote:
>>> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
>>> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS p
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/06/2013 01:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
>> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
>> registers and requires the operating system to p
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Dave Martin wrote:
>> +static int __attribute__((used)) __tegra_smc_stack[10];
>
> Use __used instead of using GCC attributes directly.
>
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * With EABI, subtype and arg already end up in r0, r1 and r2 as they are
>> + * function arguments, but we pre
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Alexandre Courbot
> wrote:
>> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
>> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
>> registers and requires the operating sy
On 06/06/2013 12:08 PM, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 10:44:48AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 06/06/2013 01:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>>> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
>>> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 10:44:48AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/06/2013 01:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> > Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
> > system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
> > registers and requires the operating
On 06/06/2013 01:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
> registers and requires the operating system to perform certain
> operations through Secure Monitor Calls ins
On 06/06/2013 04:37 AM, Alex Courbot wrote:
> Hi Tomasz,
>
> On 06/06/2013 07:17 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
...
>> I think this patch could be split into several patches:
>> - add support for firmware
>> - split reset function
>> - add reset support using firmware.
>
> Mmm possibly yes, but I w
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
> registers and requires the operating system to perform certain
> operations through Secure Monitor
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 12:17:02PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On Thursday 06 of June 2013 16:28:07 Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> > Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
> > system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
> > registers an
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 04:28:07PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
> registers and requires the operating system to perform certain
> operations through Secure
Hi Tomasz,
On 06/06/2013 07:17 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
+Global properties
+---
+
+The following properties can be specified into the "chosen" root
+node:
+
+ nvidia,secure-os: enable SecureOS.
Hmm, on Exynos we had something like
firmware@0203F
On 06/06/2013 06:35 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 04:28:07PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
+static int __attribute__((used)) __tegra_smc_stack[10];
+
+/*
+ * With EABI, subtype and arg already end up in r0, r1 and r2 as they are
+ * function arguments, but we pref
Hi Alex,
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 16:28:07 Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
> system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
> registers and requires the operating system to perform certain
> operations through S
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 04:28:07PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> +static int __attribute__((used)) __tegra_smc_stack[10];
> +
> +/*
> + * With EABI, subtype and arg already end up in r0, r1 and r2 as they are
> + * function arguments, but we prefer to play safe here and explicitly move
> + * th
Boot loaders on some Tegra devices can be unlocked but do not let the
system operate without SecureOS. SecureOS prevents access to some
registers and requires the operating system to perform certain
operations through Secure Monitor Calls instead of directly accessing
the hardware.
This patch intr
29 matches
Mail list logo
