On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 02:54:13PM +0100, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote: > Hello Mathieu, > > On 2/22/24 20:02, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 06:21:27PM +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. > >> > >> A new "to_attach" field is introduced to differentiate the use cases > >> "firmware loaded by the boot stage" and "firmware loaded by the TEE". > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> V2 to V3 update: > >> - remove stm32_rproc_tee_elf_sanity_check(), stm32_rproc_tee_elf_load() > >> stm32_rproc_tee_elf_find_loaded_rsc_table() and stm32_rproc_tee_start() that are bnow unused > >> - use new rproc::alt_boot field to sepcify that the alternate fboot method is used > >> - use stm32_rproc::to_attach field to differenciate attch mode from remoteproc tee boot mode. > >> - remove the used of stm32_rproc::fw_loaded > >> --- > >> drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > >> 1 file changed, 79 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > >> index fcc0001e2657..9cfcf66462e0 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c > >> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > >> #include <linux/remoteproc.h> > >> #include <linux/reset.h> > >> #include <linux/slab.h> > >> +#include <linux/tee_remoteproc.h> > >> #include <linux/workqueue.h> > >> > >> #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 */ > >> +#define STM32_MP1_M4_PROC_ID 0 > >> + > >> struct stm32_syscon { > >> struct regmap *map; > >> u32 reg; > >> @@ -90,6 +94,8 @@ struct stm32_rproc { > >> struct stm32_mbox mb[MBOX_NB_MBX]; > >> struct workqueue_struct *workqueue; > >> bool hold_boot_smc; > >> + bool to_attach; > >> + struct tee_rproc *trproc; > >> void __iomem *rsc_va; > >> }; > >> > >> @@ -253,10 +259,30 @@ static int stm32_rproc_release(struct rproc *rproc) > >> return err; > >> } > >> } > >> + ddata->to_attach = false; > >> > >> return err; > >> } > >> > >> +static int stm32_rproc_tee_attach(struct rproc *rproc) > >> +{ > >> + /* Nothing to do, remote proc already started by the secured context. */ > >> + 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; > >> @@ -637,10 +663,14 @@ stm32_rproc_get_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc, size_t *table_sz) > >> { > >> struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv; > >> struct device *dev = rproc->dev.parent; > >> + struct tee_rproc *trproc = ddata->trproc; > >> phys_addr_t rsc_pa; > >> u32 rsc_da; > >> int err; > >> > >> + if (trproc && !ddata->to_attach) > >> + return tee_rproc_get_loaded_rsc_table(rproc, table_sz); > >> + > > > > Why do we need a flag at all? Why can't st_rproc_tee_ops::get_loaded_rsc_table > > be set to tee_rproc_get_loaded_rsc_table()? > > > This function is used to retrieve the address of the resource table in 3 cases > - attach to a firmware started by the boot loader (U-boot). > - load of the firmware by OP-TEE. > - crash recovery on a signed firmware started by the boot loader. > > The flag is used to differentiate the attch from the other uses cases > For instance we support this use case. > 1) attach to the firmware on boot > 2) crash during runtime > 2a) stop the firmware by OP-TEE( ddata->to_attach set to 0) > 2b) load the firmware by OP-TEE > 2c) get the loaded resource table from OP-TEE (we can not guaranty > that the firmware loaded on recovery is the same) > 2d) restart the firmware by OP-TEE This is not maintainable and needs to be broken down into smaller building blocks. The introduction of tee_rproc_parse_fw() should help dealing with some of the complexity. > > > > >> /* The resource table has already been mapped, nothing to do */ > >> if (ddata->rsc_va) > >> goto done; > >> @@ -693,8 +723,20 @@ 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, > >> + .attach = stm32_rproc_tee_attach, > >> + .kick = stm32_rproc_kick, > >> + .get_loaded_rsc_table = stm32_rproc_get_loaded_rsc_table, > >> + .find_loaded_rsc_table = tee_rproc_find_loaded_rsc_table, > >> + .load = tee_rproc_load_fw, > >> +}; > >> + > >> 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 +895,7 @@ 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; > >> @@ -861,12 +904,33 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> if (ret) > >> return ret; > >> > >> - rproc = rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &st_rproc_ops, NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > >> - if (!rproc) > >> - return -ENOMEM; > > > > This patch doesn't apply to rproc-next - please rebase. > > Yes, sure. I forgot to mention in my cover letter that my series has been > applied and tested on 841c35169323 (Linux 6.8-rc4). > > > > > > >> + 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. > >> + */ > >> + trproc = tee_rproc_register(dev, 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); > >> + } > >> + } > >> > >> - ddata = rproc->priv; > >> + rproc = rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, > >> + trproc ? &st_rproc_tee_ops : &st_rproc_ops, > >> + NULL, sizeof(*ddata)); > >> + if (!rproc) { > >> + ret = -ENOMEM; > >> + goto free_tee; > >> + } > >> > >> + ddata = rproc->priv; > >> + ddata->trproc = trproc; > > > > My opinion hasn't changed from the previous patchet, i.e tee_rproc should be > > folded in struct rproc as rproc::tee_interface. > > Sure, I will do it in next version > > > > > More comments to come shortly... > > > > Thanks! > Arnaud > > >> + if (trproc) { > >> + rproc->alt_boot = true; > >> + trproc->rproc = rproc; > >> + } > >> rproc_coredump_set_elf_info(rproc, ELFCLASS32, EM_NONE); > >> > >> ret = stm32_rproc_parse_dt(pdev, ddata, &rproc->auto_boot); > >> @@ -881,8 +945,10 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> if (ret) > >> goto free_rproc; > >> > >> - if (state == M4_STATE_CRUN) > >> + if (state == M4_STATE_CRUN) { > >> rproc->state = RPROC_DETACHED; > >> + ddata->to_attach = true; > >> + } > >> > >> rproc->has_iommu = false; > >> ddata->workqueue = create_workqueue(dev_name(dev)); > >> @@ -916,6 +982,10 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> device_init_wakeup(dev, false); > >> } > >> rproc_free(rproc); > >> +free_tee: > >> + if (trproc) > >> + tee_rproc_unregister(trproc); > >> + > >> return ret; > >> } > >> > >> @@ -923,6 +993,7 @@ static void stm32_rproc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> { > >> struct rproc *rproc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > >> struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv; > >> + struct tee_rproc *trproc = ddata->trproc; > >> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > >> > >> if (atomic_read(&rproc->power) > 0) > >> @@ -937,6 +1008,8 @@ static void stm32_rproc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> device_init_wakeup(dev, false); > >> } > >> rproc_free(rproc); > >> + if (trproc) > >> + tee_rproc_unregister(trproc); > >> } > >> > >> static int stm32_rproc_suspend(struct device *dev) > >> -- > >> 2.25.1 > >> > >