On 09/29, Rob Clark wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c
> index c1e4325..e1ac97f 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c
> @@ -500,6 +500,59 @@ int __qcom_scm_hdcp_req(struct qcom_scm_hdcp_req *req, u32 req_cnt, u32 *resp)
> req, req_cnt * sizeof(*req), resp, sizeof(*resp));
> }
>
> +int __qcom_scm_ocmem_secure_cfg(unsigned sec_id)
> +{
> + int ret, scm_ret = 0;
> + struct msm_scm_sec_cfg {
We've left these as anonymous structs for things like
qcom_scm_set_boot_addr(), maybe we should do the same here.
> + __le32 id;
> + __le32 spare;
Also, the iommu driver would use this API and it uses this
"spare" element, so perhaps this whole function should be renamed
to be more generic and take two values. Downstream the function
is called scm_restore_sec_cfg, so maybe something similar. And
the service id is MP for "memory protection", so
QCOM_SCM_OCMEM_SECURE_SVC could be QCOM_SCM_MEMORY_PROTECTION?
Otherwise this patch looks good.
> + } cfg;
> +
> + cfg.id = cpu_to_le32(sec_id);
> +
> + ret = qcom_scm_call(QCOM_SCM_OCMEM_SECURE_SVC, QCOM_SCM_OCMEM_SECURE_CFG,
> + &cfg, sizeof(cfg), &scm_ret, sizeof(scm_ret));
> +
> + if (ret || scm_ret)
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
