linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v1 2/2] dw_mmc-bluefield: add hw

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]

Message-ID:
 <BN9PR12MB506861D155E2BFC6B8B61252D3D52@BN9PR12MB5068.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 19:13:43 +0000
From: Liming Sun <limings@...dia.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
CC: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, David Thompson
	<davthompson@...dia.com>, "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 2/2] dw_mmc-bluefield: add hw_reset() support

Thanks, Uffe. Please see some comments/questions below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 10:22 AM
> To: Liming Sun <limings@...dia.com>
> Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>; David Thompson
> <davthompson@...dia.com>; linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] dw_mmc-bluefield: add hw_reset() support
> 
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 00:53, Liming Sun <limings@...dia.com> wrote:
> >
> > The eMMC RST_N register is implemented as secure register on
> > BlueField SoC and controlled by ATF. This commit sends SMC call
> > to ATF for the eMMC HW reset.
> 
> Just to make sure I get this correctly. Asserting the eMMC reset line
> is managed through a secure register? Or is this about resetting the
> eMMC controller?

Yes, asserting the eMMC reset line (RST_N) is managed through a secure register.
It's the same register but implemented as secure and can only be written in ATF.

> 
> No matter what, it looks to me that it should be implemented as a
> reset provider.

Do you mean that ' hw_reset()' should implement the whole function instead of just the toggling the RST_N?

> 
> Kind regards
> Uffe
> 
> >
> > Reviewed-by: David Thompson <davthompson@...dia.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Liming Sun <limings@...dia.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-bluefield.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-bluefield.c
> b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-bluefield.c
> > index 4747e5698f48..24e0b604b405 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-bluefield.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-bluefield.c
> > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> >   * Copyright (C) 2018 Mellanox Technologies.
> >   */
> >
> > +#include <linux/arm-smccc.h>
> >  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
> >  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> >  #include <linux/mmc/host.h>
> > @@ -20,6 +21,9 @@
> >  #define BLUEFIELD_UHS_REG_EXT_SAMPLE   2
> >  #define BLUEFIELD_UHS_REG_EXT_DRIVE    4
> >
> > +/* SMC call for RST_N */
> > +#define BLUEFIELD_SMC_SET_EMMC_RST_N   0x82000007
> > +
> >  static void dw_mci_bluefield_set_ios(struct dw_mci *host, struct mmc_ios
> *ios)
> >  {
> >         u32 reg;
> > @@ -34,8 +38,20 @@ static void dw_mci_bluefield_set_ios(struct dw_mci
> *host, struct mmc_ios *ios)
> >         mci_writel(host, UHS_REG_EXT, reg);
> >  }
> >
> > +static void dw_mci_bluefield_hw_reset(struct dw_mci *host)
> > +{
> > +               struct arm_smccc_res res = { 0 };
> > +
> > +               arm_smccc_smc(BLUEFIELD_SMC_SET_EMMC_RST_N, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> 0, 0,
> > +                             &res);
> > +
> > +               if (res.a0)
> > +                       pr_err("RST_N failed.\n");
> > +}
> > +
> >  static const struct dw_mci_drv_data bluefield_drv_data = {
> > -       .set_ios                = dw_mci_bluefield_set_ios
> > +       .set_ios                = dw_mci_bluefield_set_ios,
> > +       .hw_reset               = dw_mci_bluefield_hw_reset
> >  };
> >
> >  static const struct of_device_id dw_mci_bluefield_match[] = {
> > --
> > 2.30.1
> >