On 10/27/2023 1:17 PM, Yong Wu (吴勇) wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-10-26 at 10:18 +0530, Vijayanand Jitta wrote:
>>
>> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
>> you have verified the sender or the content.
>>
>>
>> On 10/20/2023 3:29 PM, Yong Wu (吴勇) wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2023-10-19 at 10:15 +0530, Vijayanand Jitta wrote:
>>>>
>>>> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments
>> until
>>>> you have verified the sender or the content.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/11/2023 8:00 AM, Yong Wu wrote:
>>>>> Initialise a mtk_svp heap. Currently just add a null heap,
>> Prepare
>>>> for
>>>>> the later patches.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig | 8 ++
>>>>> drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Makefile | 1 +
>>>>> drivers/dma-buf/heaps/mtk_secure_heap.c | 99
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> [...]
>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static struct dma_buf *
>>>>> +mtk_sec_heap_allocate(struct dma_heap *heap, size_t size,
>>>>> + unsigned long fd_flags, unsigned long heap_flags)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +struct mtk_secure_heap_buffer *sec_buf;
>>>>> +DEFINE_DMA_BUF_EXPORT_INFO(exp_info);
>>>>> +struct dma_buf *dmabuf;
>>>>> +int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +sec_buf = kzalloc(sizeof(*sec_buf), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>
>>>> As we know, kzalloc can only allocate 4MB at max. So, secure heap
>> has
>>>> this limitation.
>>>> can we have a way to allocate more memory in secure heap ? maybe
>>>> similar to how system heap does?
>>>
>>> This is just the size of a internal structure. I guess you mean the
>>> secure memory size here. Regarding secure memory allocating flow,
>> our
>>> flow may be different with yours.
>>>
>>> Let me explain our flow, we have two secure buffer types(heaps).
>>> a) mtk_svp
>>> b) mtk_svp_cma which requires the cma binding.
>>>
>>> The memory management of both is inside the TEE. We only need to
>> tell
>>> the TEE which type and size of buffer we want, and then the TEE
>> will
>>> perform and return the memory handle to the kernel. The
>>> kzalloc/alloc_pages is for the normal buffers.
>>>
>>> Regarding the CMA buffer, we only call cma_alloc once, and its
>>> management is also within the TEE.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the details.
>>
>> I see for mvp_svp, allocation is also specific to TEE, as TEE takes
>> care of allocation as well.
>
> Yes. The allocation management of these two heaps is in the TEE.
>
>>
>> I was thinking if allocation path can also be made generic ? without
>> having
>> dependency on TEE.
>> For eg : A case where we want to allocate from kernel and secure that
>> memory,
>> the current secure heap design can't be used.
>
> Sorry, This may be because our HW is special. The HW could protect a
> certain region, but it can only protect 32 regions. So we cannot
> allocate them in the kernel arbitrarily and then enter TEE to protect
> them.
>
Got your point , I see for your case allocation must happen in TEE.
I was just saying if we want to make secure heap generic and remove
hard dependency on TEE, we must have a way to allocate irrespective
of what hypervisor/TZ being used. As current design for secure heap
assumes OPTEE.
We have a case where allocation happens in kernel and we secure it
using qcom_scm_assign_mem , this wouldn't be possible with current
design.
Probably some ops to allocate, similar to ops you pointed out to secure ?
in you case these ops would just allocate the internal structure.
Thanks,
Vijay
>>
>> Also i suppose TEE allocates contiguous memory for mtk_svp ? or does
>> it support
>> scattered memory ?
>
> Yes. After the TEE runs for a period of time, the TEE memory will
> become discontinuous, and a secure IOMMU exists in the TEE.
>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Vijay
>>>>
