[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230327161857.GA32697@willie-the-truck>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 17:18:57 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org,
agross@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org, amit.pundir@...aro.org,
regressions@...mhuis.info, sumit.semwal@...aro.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, robin.murphy@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 00/11] Fix XPU violation during modem metadata
authentication
Hi Sibi,
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 02:28:29PM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> The memory region allocated using dma_alloc_attr with no kernel mapping
> attribute set would still be a part of the linear kernel map. Any access
> to this region by the application processor after assigning it to the
> remote Q6 will result in a XPU violation. Fix this by replacing the
> dynamically allocated memory region with a no-map carveout and unmap the
> modem metadata memory region before passing control to the remote Q6.
> The addition of the carveout and memunmap is required only on SoCs that
> mandate memory protection before transferring control to Q6, hence the
> driver falls back to dynamic memory allocation in the absence of the
> modem metadata carveout.
[...]
> remoteproc: qcom_q6v5_mss: Use a carveout to authenticate modem
> headers
With this change now merged, am I ok to downgrade the arm64
arch_dma_prep_coherent() back to a clean?
Thanks,
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists