| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <65dcdd9c-a75b-4fe7-bdcf-471a5602db20@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 18:06:46 +0100
From: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
To: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] remoteproc: qcom: pas: make region assign more
generic
Hi,
On 30/10/2023 14:10, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
>
>
> On 10/30/2023 3:33 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> The current memory region assign only supports a single
>> memory region.
>>
>> But new platforms introduces more regions to make the
>> memory requirements more flexible for various use cases.
>> Those new platforms also shares the memory region between the
>> DSP and HLOS.
>>
>> To handle this, make the region assign more generic in order
>> to support more than a single memory region and also permit
>> setting the regions permissions as shared.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c
>> index 913a5d2068e8..4829fd26e17d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c
>> @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@
>> #define ADSP_DECRYPT_SHUTDOWN_DELAY_MS 100
>> +#define MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT 2
>> +
>> struct adsp_data {
>> int crash_reason_smem;
>> const char *firmware_name;
>> @@ -51,6 +53,9 @@ struct adsp_data {
>> int ssctl_id;
>> int region_assign_idx;
>> + int region_assign_count;
>> + bool region_assign_shared;
>> + int region_assign_vmid;
>> };
>> struct qcom_adsp {
>> @@ -87,15 +92,18 @@ struct qcom_adsp {
>> phys_addr_t dtb_mem_phys;
>> phys_addr_t mem_reloc;
>> phys_addr_t dtb_mem_reloc;
>> - phys_addr_t region_assign_phys;
>> + phys_addr_t region_assign_phys[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT];
>> void *mem_region;
>> void *dtb_mem_region;
>> size_t mem_size;
>> size_t dtb_mem_size;
>> - size_t region_assign_size;
>> + size_t region_assign_size[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT];
>> int region_assign_idx;
>> - u64 region_assign_perms;
>> + int region_assign_count;
>> + bool region_assign_shared;
>> + int region_assign_vmid;
>> + u64 region_assign_perms[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT];
>> struct qcom_rproc_glink glink_subdev;
>> struct qcom_rproc_subdev smd_subdev;
>> @@ -590,37 +598,52 @@ static int adsp_alloc_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp)
>> static int adsp_assign_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp)
>> {
>> - struct reserved_mem *rmem = NULL;
>> - struct qcom_scm_vmperm perm;
>> + struct qcom_scm_vmperm perm[MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT];
>> + unsigned int perm_size = 1;
>
> AFAICS, not need of initialization.
Indeed, removed
>
>> struct device_node *node;
>> - int ret;
>> + int offset, ret;
>
> Nit: one variable per line.
Done
>
>> if (!adsp->region_assign_idx)
>
> Not related to this patch..
> Should not this be valid only for > 1 ?
I don't understand, only region_assign_idx > 1 triggers a memory_assign,
and this check discards configurations with region_assign_idx == 0 as
expected.
>
>
>> return 0;
>> - node = of_parse_phandle(adsp->dev->of_node, "memory-region", adsp->region_assign_idx);
>> - if (node)
>> - rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(node);
>> - of_node_put(node);
>> - if (!rmem) {
>> - dev_err(adsp->dev, "unable to resolve shareable memory-region\n");
>> - return -EINVAL;
>> - }
>> + for (offset = 0; offset < adsp->region_assign_count; ++offset) {
>> + struct reserved_mem *rmem = NULL;
>> +
>> + node = of_parse_phandle(adsp->dev->of_node, "memory-region",
>> + adsp->region_assign_idx + offset);
>> + if (node)
>> + rmem = of_reserved_mem_lookup(node);
>> + of_node_put(node);
>> + if (!rmem) {
>> + dev_err(adsp->dev, "unable to resolve shareable memory-region index %d\n",
>> + offset);
>> + return -EINVAL; > + }
>
>
>> - perm.vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA;
>> - perm.perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>> + if (adsp->region_assign_shared) {
>> + perm[0].vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
>> + perm[0].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>> + perm[1].vmid = adsp->region_assign_vmid;
>> + perm[1].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>> + perm_size = 2;
>> + } else {
>> + perm[0].vmid = adsp->region_assign_vmid;
>> + perm[0].perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>> + perm_size = 1;
>> + }
>> - adsp->region_assign_phys = rmem->base;
>> - adsp->region_assign_size = rmem->size;
>> - adsp->region_assign_perms = BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS);
>> + adsp->region_assign_phys[offset] = rmem->base;
>> + adsp->region_assign_size[offset] = rmem->size;
>> + adsp->region_assign_perms[offset] = BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS);
>
> Do we need array for this, is this changing ?
We need to keep region_assign_perms for unassign, but for the other 2 we would
need to duplicate the code from adsp_assign_memory_region into
adsp_unassign_memory_region.
>
>> - ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys,
>> - adsp->region_assign_size,
>> - &adsp->region_assign_perms,
>> - &perm, 1);
>> - if (ret < 0) {
>> - dev_err(adsp->dev, "assign memory failed\n");
>> - return ret;
>> + ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys[offset],
>> + adsp->region_assign_size[offset],
>> + &adsp->region_assign_perms[offset],
>> + perm, perm_size);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + dev_err(adsp->dev, "assign memory %d failed\n", offset);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> }
>> return 0;
>> @@ -629,20 +652,22 @@ static int adsp_assign_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp)
>> static void adsp_unassign_memory_region(struct qcom_adsp *adsp)
>> {
>> struct qcom_scm_vmperm perm;
>> - int ret;
>> + int offset, ret;
>> - if (!adsp->region_assign_idx)
>> + if (!adsp->region_assign_idx || adsp->region_assign_shared)
>> return;
>> - perm.vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
>> - perm.perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>> + for (offset = 0; offset < adsp->region_assign_count; ++offset) {
>> + perm.vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS;
>> + perm.perm = QCOM_SCM_PERM_RW;
>
>> - ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys,
>> - adsp->region_assign_size,
>> - &adsp->region_assign_perms,
>> - &perm, 1);
>> - if (ret < 0)
>> - dev_err(adsp->dev, "unassign memory failed\n");
>> + ret = qcom_scm_assign_mem(adsp->region_assign_phys[offset],
>> + adsp->region_assign_size[offset],
>> + &adsp->region_assign_perms[offset],
>> + &perm, 1);
>> + if (ret < 0)
>> + dev_err(adsp->dev, "unassign memory failed\n");
>> + }
>> }
>> static int adsp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> @@ -696,6 +721,9 @@ static int adsp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> adsp->info_name = desc->sysmon_name;
>> adsp->decrypt_shutdown = desc->decrypt_shutdown;
>> adsp->region_assign_idx = desc->region_assign_idx;
>> + adsp->region_assign_count = min_t(int, MAX_ASSIGN_COUNT, desc->region_assign_count);
>> + adsp->region_assign_vmid = desc->region_assign_vmid;
>> + adsp->region_assign_shared = desc->region_assign_shared;
>> if (dtb_fw_name) {
>> adsp->dtb_firmware_name = dtb_fw_name;
>> adsp->dtb_pas_id = desc->dtb_pas_id;
>> @@ -1163,6 +1191,8 @@ static const struct adsp_data sm8550_mpss_resource = {
>> .sysmon_name = "modem",
>> .ssctl_id = 0x12,
>> .region_assign_idx = 2,
>> + .region_assign_count = 1,
>> + .region_assign_vmid = QCOM_SCM_VMID_MSS_MSA,
>> };
>> static const struct of_device_id adsp_of_match[] = {
>>
>
> -Mukesh
Thanks,
Neil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists