linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: tegra: basic support for Trusted Foundations

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:19:29 -0600
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
CC:	Joseph Lo <josephl@...dia.com>, Karan Jhavar <kjhavar@...dia.com>,
	Varun Wadekar <vwadekar@...dia.com>,
	Chris Johnson <CJohnson@...dia.com>,
	Matthew Longnecker <MLongnecker@...dia.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
	Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
	Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>, gnurou@...il.com,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: tegra: basic support for Trusted Foundations

On 06/13/2013 03:12 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> Add basic support for booting secondary processors on Tegra devices
> using the Trusted Foundations secure monitor.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra.txt    | 11 +++++
>  .../devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt        |  1 +
>  arch/arm/configs/tegra_defconfig                   |  1 +

The defconfig change should be a separate patch, so that I can squash it
into any other defconfig updates separately from all the code changes.

> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/firmware.c b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/firmware.c

> +void __init tegra_init_firmware(void)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *node;
> +
> +	if (!of_have_populated_dt())
> +		return;
> +
> +	node = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "tl,trusted-foundations");
> +	if (node && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TEGRA_TRUSTED_FOUNDATIONS))
> +		pr_warn("Trusted Foundations detected but support missing!\n");
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TEGRA_TRUSTED_FOUNDATIONS)
> +	else if (node)
> +		register_firmware_ops(&tegra_trusted_foundations_ops);
> +#endif
> +}

Is it worth continuing on in the node && !IS_ENABLED case here? After
all, we can be pretty certain that the write to the CPU reset vector is
immediately going to trap...

I suppose that perhaps without SMP, cpuidle, suspend, ... we could keep
running, but that seems a little niche.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/