On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 01:33:42PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 20/12/12 12:22, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + /* CNTFRQ */
> >>>>> + asm("mcr p15, 0, %0, c14, c0, 0\n" : : "r" (freq));
> >>>>> + asm("mrc p15, 0, %0, c14, c0, 0\n" : "=r" (val));
> >>>>> + BUG_ON(val != freq);
> >>>>
> >>>> This is scary. CNTFRQ is only writable from secure mode, and will
> >>>> explode in any other situation.
> >>>>
> >>>> Also, writing to CNTFRQ doesn't change the timer frequency! This is just
> >>>> a way for secure mode to tell the rest of the world the frequency the
> >>>> timer is ticking at. Unless you've wired the input clock to be able to
> >>>> change the frequency?
> >>>
> >>> ATM, our upstream kernel is expected in secure mode. This situation
> >>> may be changed later, though....
> >>
> >> I appreciate this. But I expect this kernel to be also used on the
> >> non-secure side if someone tried to run KVM with it. And this would go
> >> bang right away.
> >>
> >
> > But the guest wouldn't necessarily have this peripheral, or any other Tegra114
> > peripheral for that matter?
>
> The problem is not so much the guest but the host. The host has to be
> booted in non-secure, so just saying "we do not support non-secure" is
> not a very convincing argument.
>
> Unless of course you've already decided that you don't want to support
> KVM on this SoC...
>
I guess that means we can't support KVM yet. Tegra does not have a secure
monitor by default. It all depends on what that system integrator does.
Cheers,
Peter.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
