From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f171.google.com (mail-pl1-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E1CE4DA0E for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:51:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711385508; cv=none; b=lC6Z9HHkkDsLZ9Ssc58Z5R3cT9idNSu3kUiD9A8N17cl1JhLOV3MWr+rqdAzlM4GJIQRY2M6+ZQChZDJZCGIGx0FFGLiXMal18P2DeTRrC0n8vdJvHjHEQttALx6eNkA7a2iS0YbFzAMm1uMt04HrPbGFZ4YiPlLYCKHKFMHzCQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711385508; c=relaxed/simple; bh=R1UgrdHtX7NaBhIlzazKjCiPt8qDyKrwuHqMIduiCrA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Epx9o/ivGBhMZj0Isztahtg7uvWLNpP/hZq/X0xas1Yu9wgHyir5QYQOB0VbChWXMJXa7qS17APlcYOTM+TMqlx7oG3GLQyARpvLg4rwo9MUGUntCn9MjizQ8kkK/jkeLhnS0ly/N2tsI+hMWcXhMwYQq0aYUbBZfaaty0OXBKs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b=vqSN8ykM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="vqSN8ykM" Received: by mail-pl1-f171.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1e034607879so35610375ad.0 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:51:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; t=1711385506; x=1711990306; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pj8PTKVryqKwwdBoZ+0WnicFRNErWIn69RAMUd5IKdc=; b=vqSN8ykMVrd2oHNvAGS9j0SG0p8EODHibAzv/GO+LRemaM7hMLCowpopYxNYTlQmVH n7y5rZXwnx+5RAY+Gz/+NuYNk7Lm9ktAuVAQa9EXWRPb9W2xPKMvvlQq6qaFjz5SmqXl CwSWRTKHM+DHoEAIz3Gkyy4BcOTyV5suZSdoEy0y8q3ffnviZfgiHoWcDZk8XEGJUawz fWrg6DEixZQVpv2XRklgjQBM5Mz7JEhb9K+uN4UuhVxyPk6lygsocVWDicgvGX8KZKqL nl3L8jnvLywG28l2P0X9ExdesLhCCplB8w8R50k/SDIsYdKp+KIXXXiGkNY8LTJ+G0Uv UJEg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711385506; x=1711990306; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=pj8PTKVryqKwwdBoZ+0WnicFRNErWIn69RAMUd5IKdc=; b=s2MJnfuvRVfHNp8MLQNWQG0VZg1hjfdLEffrR173YqW6OX6PxJtsSD43/QnlboADvO uoUUuZPBKZzHUli9n48V7UB9QYGdMRdEhBdNV9z2X5oukeP2OqmPA1EbLPsC/cTIuBAE pxZuix9UX2BnMSxJQal2diNPFO96TQFLJfBepmCp+VNcYxgz3CVMZDHgbMEkD8evTZtm UyGDiVDSbPy1vL+m4QoNxnFDGUNT/Mt+4SrUH3/KBUmbklLNemF92B5BG4g+C70JCZeW 0E7Dm+/fEIhMrflwBBTXLerwbfI0uUhbjJziV67PBUmr3ZIxthyoS8t2Wh8IsrKNpRu9 XeQw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWg1d5QMz47mYzxFasfSROhIVR3INkMo6IhE5qgXPJuJPJkTIsry7dDLD/TmCZWjWh6+dzOirAjT5qw9RKA0NdJHGq8Txd3BqoK73rV X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy4xC/sQXDQVQHqnaqKgYWNOnyR8hgx6g0WrGOkYh0q/PGJ0v58 3KpHRiw3Ju5tRo2p/dZ5NEW52wz3p/Hyj1J1KL78UtBmkeX+6vwfcb/BkoI4/4sG9JJCHR7flm/ 9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGoV4RhZKceQIINbyMVzRZ5e1HPuju79F8lHHNd/Bx3c+IjzhBFu/0IBlEFjOn25VeKI5qwIA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f54c:b0:1de:ff81:f650 with SMTP id h12-20020a170902f54c00b001deff81f650mr12006579plf.10.1711385505732; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p14s ([2604:3d09:148c:c800:4a22:28de:eba3:89d1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j5-20020a170902da8500b001e0c568ae8fsm1517672plx.192.2024.03.25.09.51.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 10:51:42 -0600 From: Mathieu Poirier To: Arnaud Pouliquen Cc: Bjorn Andersson , Jens Wiklander , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] remoteproc: stm32: Add support of an OP-TEE TA to load the firmware Message-ID: References: <20240308144708.62362-1-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> <20240308144708.62362-5-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240308144708.62362-5-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 03:47:08PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote: > The new TEE remoteproc device is used to manage remote firmware in a > secure, trusted context. The 'st,stm32mp1-m4-tee' compatibility is > introduced to delegate the loading of the firmware to the trusted > execution context. In such cases, the firmware should be signed and > adhere to the image format defined by the TEE. > > Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen > --- > Updates from V3: > - remove support of the attach use case. Will be addressed in a separate > thread, > - add st_rproc_tee_ops::parse_fw ops, > - inverse call of devm_rproc_alloc()and tee_rproc_register() to manage cross > reference between the rproc struct and the tee_rproc struct in tee_rproc.c. > --- > drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > index 8cd838df4e92..13df33c78aa2 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > #include > > #include "remoteproc_internal.h" > @@ -49,6 +50,9 @@ > #define M4_STATE_STANDBY 4 > #define M4_STATE_CRASH 5 > > +/* Remote processor unique identifier aligned with the Trusted Execution Environment definitions */ Why is this the case? At least from the kernel side it is possible to call tee_rproc_register() with any kind of value, why is there a need to be any kind of alignment with the TEE? > +#define STM32_MP1_M4_PROC_ID 0 > + > struct stm32_syscon { > struct regmap *map; > u32 reg; > @@ -257,6 +261,19 @@ static int stm32_rproc_release(struct rproc *rproc) > return 0; > } > > +static int stm32_rproc_tee_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > +{ > + int err; > + > + stm32_rproc_request_shutdown(rproc); > + > + err = tee_rproc_stop(rproc); > + if (err) > + return err; > + > + return stm32_rproc_release(rproc); > +} > + > static int stm32_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc) > { > struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent; > @@ -693,8 +710,19 @@ static const struct rproc_ops st_rproc_ops = { > .get_boot_addr = rproc_elf_get_boot_addr, > }; > > +static const struct rproc_ops st_rproc_tee_ops = { > + .prepare = stm32_rproc_prepare, > + .start = tee_rproc_start, > + .stop = stm32_rproc_tee_stop, > + .kick = stm32_rproc_kick, > + .load = tee_rproc_load_fw, > + .parse_fw = tee_rproc_parse_fw, > + .find_loaded_rsc_table = tee_rproc_find_loaded_rsc_table, > +}; > + > static const struct of_device_id stm32_rproc_match[] = { > - { .compatible = "st,stm32mp1-m4" }, > + {.compatible = "st,stm32mp1-m4",}, > + {.compatible = "st,stm32mp1-m4-tee",}, > {}, > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, stm32_rproc_match); > @@ -853,6 +881,7 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > struct stm32_rproc *ddata; > struct device_node *np = dev->of_node; > + struct tee_rproc *trproc = NULL; > struct rproc *rproc; > unsigned int state; > int ret; > @@ -861,9 +890,26 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (ret) > return ret; > > - rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &st_rproc_ops, NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > - if (!rproc) > - return -ENOMEM; > + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "st,stm32mp1-m4-tee")) { > + /* > + * Delegate the firmware management to the secure context. > + * The firmware loaded has to be signed. > + */ > + rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &st_rproc_tee_ops, NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > + if (!rproc) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + trproc = tee_rproc_register(dev, rproc, STM32_MP1_M4_PROC_ID); > + if (IS_ERR(trproc)) { > + dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(trproc), > + "signed firmware not supported by TEE\n"); > + return PTR_ERR(trproc); > + } > + } else { > + rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &st_rproc_ops, NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > + if (!rproc) > + return -ENOMEM; > + } > > ddata = rproc->priv; > > @@ -915,6 +961,9 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(dev); > device_init_wakeup(dev, false); > } > + if (trproc) if (rproc->tee_interface) I am done reviewing this set. Thanks, Mathieu > + tee_rproc_unregister(trproc); > + > return ret; > } > > @@ -935,6 +984,9 @@ static void stm32_rproc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(dev); > device_init_wakeup(dev, false); > } > + if (rproc->tee_interface) > + tee_rproc_unregister(rproc->tee_interface); > + > } > > static int stm32_rproc_suspend(struct device *dev) > -- > 2.25.1 > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F331C54E58 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:52:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=t/gMi90/uvAuG2YmGTd2WI7sVOqTIgep5dHS1W+u928=; b=D5dGzwfiHL+qrJ q5/sb6zAl/8bKl5vQSithmapVag0Pgts4DKkGDgrlQaJdjaG3nHVfcFB5EmzsVhBknZnhSBOwXk4L xBJ4Sa+p9uWuMuLHns6jcX2wxqvySC4UxuPS1iXmvIpQYJOlBt0mqreUbuuVWosmyJAi4frEWZrQD L4+l9Sj7SZGQIv7d8tvg2fXpGT90VU4ygcevR4Tr/mwiZONmnywoM/nyUixHt4GzXH2O1omsM0SvN Z8TvaDw0oBh0rZExa11zW4V3dLdn6B5zFjsIL3jT1LBpx2NIt8Bk+8apSXux7HAwi66ov0a8q0ExT d+aR/C9nNk4L+l/5Am7g==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ronY7-00000000s3Z-2gH3; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:51:51 +0000 Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ronY3-00000000s13-3GjH for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:51:49 +0000 Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1dca3951ad9so30475175ad.3 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:51:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; t=1711385506; x=1711990306; darn=lists.infradead.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pj8PTKVryqKwwdBoZ+0WnicFRNErWIn69RAMUd5IKdc=; b=sBC2EmbDJGPkcBnBZepLcQjDoERlbyciDjJvY7dyLLzhT+hptZBm59hvMZEqMo43RV cSqnvXEgmNhHUHvlrwQNU+u8BHMFVChy8P7DUhap+0I4jO5ot8WM0zafqvT3WPbmzv8P hVlaFaGUTSlQI2mXe9J0vAdQEM1WV2C2Xaqp02p3D2owYtu4eNymCFveOItNy142qY+m agiOCjAjnn3uzW4wQIpPO9IUARfxKUACrr5sX6u1HjgPluY2rRc24P8A3K3bxsDoFLV/ HAWtQxJxycumxb8ojE+KswTwf7Oc6owJmPPky6qAI9JuklBNZBbIKudj3C2v1jiMVHTB 1XNw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711385506; x=1711990306; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=pj8PTKVryqKwwdBoZ+0WnicFRNErWIn69RAMUd5IKdc=; b=icOwV48OzcH+7uOJfpBxQRJ9qyEVZ4aOwrrd+9Jcaez+RSBHK18oxGjOV7Wgq+Zu4F a6lrEjNYLSfqbZ9oF54gti7f1xXpGCyvH0RJbkfMBKqP8fytUUJ4kTeqUJjm7S6Ouhj+ qKk8gkWff9Jox3oSzXo08GmP32pEJgSRVTfHCqGDoVxug5leUbRPD/LiXJE8zb9wvJG1 NegjHQZqLTqZz/LUJ9sEuBSwHmF/XNPPyW8FKBzSmRVx0K5XPIjv/SkHRGNQNvghRQLr prvmDiR0zbPXHfQbPBCH1a8IC/XoPNEPvrdidywyDzJFHlgjEcvomFvFXjHH0PWmOZ5r 56jQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVVlgp6TIFohmiH6lJaU6T/X9fkD1ONeRffwuFVcG0z2Tmvfc+qVXgkvVtL0lVeZwV+yKlk2olP5i7guh9njaSps4BIX+Egiadj9Iyos5RnbJhazUk= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywbud/Q7rSoZYQ8DU0CKjdNyDhN7QvCcVMqL9JQNMJ4Eukhs2xg 7EYU0f1eAA0/JgNqlhW+HIyXX2QeyG9ppe9XyM48I7n9bSwm6whKw/YB3Nxs5QQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGoV4RhZKceQIINbyMVzRZ5e1HPuju79F8lHHNd/Bx3c+IjzhBFu/0IBlEFjOn25VeKI5qwIA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f54c:b0:1de:ff81:f650 with SMTP id h12-20020a170902f54c00b001deff81f650mr12006579plf.10.1711385505732; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p14s ([2604:3d09:148c:c800:4a22:28de:eba3:89d1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j5-20020a170902da8500b001e0c568ae8fsm1517672plx.192.2024.03.25.09.51.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 10:51:42 -0600 From: Mathieu Poirier To: Arnaud Pouliquen Cc: Bjorn Andersson , Jens Wiklander , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] remoteproc: stm32: Add support of an OP-TEE TA to load the firmware Message-ID: References: <20240308144708.62362-1-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> <20240308144708.62362-5-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240308144708.62362-5-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240325_095147_875398_BE75E0CF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 33.29 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 03:47:08PM +0100, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote: > The new TEE remoteproc device is used to manage remote firmware in a > secure, trusted context. The 'st,stm32mp1-m4-tee' compatibility is > introduced to delegate the loading of the firmware to the trusted > execution context. In such cases, the firmware should be signed and > adhere to the image format defined by the TEE. > > Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen > --- > Updates from V3: > - remove support of the attach use case. Will be addressed in a separate > thread, > - add st_rproc_tee_ops::parse_fw ops, > - inverse call of devm_rproc_alloc()and tee_rproc_register() to manage cross > reference between the rproc struct and the tee_rproc struct in tee_rproc.c. > --- > drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > index 8cd838df4e92..13df33c78aa2 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > #include > > #include "remoteproc_internal.h" > @@ -49,6 +50,9 @@ > #define M4_STATE_STANDBY 4 > #define M4_STATE_CRASH 5 > > +/* Remote processor unique identifier aligned with the Trusted Execution Environment definitions */ Why is this the case? At least from the kernel side it is possible to call tee_rproc_register() with any kind of value, why is there a need to be any kind of alignment with the TEE? > +#define STM32_MP1_M4_PROC_ID 0 > + > struct stm32_syscon { > struct regmap *map; > u32 reg; > @@ -257,6 +261,19 @@ static int stm32_rproc_release(struct rproc *rproc) > return 0; > } > > +static int stm32_rproc_tee_stop(struct rproc *rproc) > +{ > + int err; > + > + stm32_rproc_request_shutdown(rproc); > + > + err = tee_rproc_stop(rproc); > + if (err) > + return err; > + > + return stm32_rproc_release(rproc); > +} > + > static int stm32_rproc_prepare(struct rproc *rproc) > { > struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent; > @@ -693,8 +710,19 @@ static const struct rproc_ops st_rproc_ops = { > .get_boot_addr = rproc_elf_get_boot_addr, > }; > > +static const struct rproc_ops st_rproc_tee_ops = { > + .prepare = stm32_rproc_prepare, > + .start = tee_rproc_start, > + .stop = stm32_rproc_tee_stop, > + .kick = stm32_rproc_kick, > + .load = tee_rproc_load_fw, > + .parse_fw = tee_rproc_parse_fw, > + .find_loaded_rsc_table = tee_rproc_find_loaded_rsc_table, > +}; > + > static const struct of_device_id stm32_rproc_match[] = { > - { .compatible = "st,stm32mp1-m4" }, > + {.compatible = "st,stm32mp1-m4",}, > + {.compatible = "st,stm32mp1-m4-tee",}, > {}, > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, stm32_rproc_match); > @@ -853,6 +881,7 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > struct stm32_rproc *ddata; > struct device_node *np = dev->of_node; > + struct tee_rproc *trproc = NULL; > struct rproc *rproc; > unsigned int state; > int ret; > @@ -861,9 +890,26 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (ret) > return ret; > > - rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &st_rproc_ops, NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > - if (!rproc) > - return -ENOMEM; > + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "st,stm32mp1-m4-tee")) { > + /* > + * Delegate the firmware management to the secure context. > + * The firmware loaded has to be signed. > + */ > + rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &st_rproc_tee_ops, NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > + if (!rproc) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + trproc = tee_rproc_register(dev, rproc, STM32_MP1_M4_PROC_ID); > + if (IS_ERR(trproc)) { > + dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(trproc), > + "signed firmware not supported by TEE\n"); > + return PTR_ERR(trproc); > + } > + } else { > + rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &st_rproc_ops, NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > + if (!rproc) > + return -ENOMEM; > + } > > ddata = rproc->priv; > > @@ -915,6 +961,9 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(dev); > device_init_wakeup(dev, false); > } > + if (trproc) if (rproc->tee_interface) I am done reviewing this set. Thanks, Mathieu > + tee_rproc_unregister(trproc); > + > return ret; > } > > @@ -935,6 +984,9 @@ static void stm32_rproc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(dev); > device_init_wakeup(dev, false); > } > + if (rproc->tee_interface) > + tee_rproc_unregister(rproc->tee_interface); > + > } > > static int stm32_rproc_suspend(struct device *dev) > -- > 2.25.1 > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel