On 06/21/2012 02:15 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am in the process of adding a device-tree binding for OMAP timers and
> I have encountered a scenario where ideally it would be useful to remove
> a device-tree node at runtime.
>
> The scenario is this ...
>
> 1. OMAP3 devices may or may not have security features enabled. Security
> enabled devices are known as high-secure (HS) and devices without
> security are known as general purpose (GP).
> 2. For OMAP3 devices there are 12 general purpose timers available.
> 3. On secure devices the 12th timer is reserved for secure usage and so
> cannot be used by the kernel, where as for a GP device it is available.
> 4. We can detect the OMAP device type, secure or GP, at runtime via an
> on-chip register.
> 5. Today, when not using DT, we do not register the 12th timer as a linux
> device if the device is secure.
>
> When migrating the timers to DT, I need a way to prevent this 12th timer
> from being registered as a device on a secure device. The options I have
> considered are ...
>
> a. Have separate a omap3.dtsi for GP and secure devices or place the
> node for the 12th timer in a omap3-gp.dtsi that is only used for
> boards with GP devices. The downside of this is that for boards
> that can support GP and secure device (such as the omap3 SDP) we
> require a separate dtb blob.
>
> b. Remove the timer node dynamically at runtime using the
> of_node_detach() API. In this solution we define a "ti,timer-secure"
> property that the 12th timer on omap3 devices would have and at
> runtime if we are a secure omap3 device, we search the timer nodes
> for any nodes with this property and remove them.
>
> Option B, seems to be the better option but requires me to enable
> CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC for all omap devices and I was not sure if there is any
> downside to doing so. Enabling this feature does not seem to add much code
> as far as I can tell, however, I wanted to get some feedback before
> proposing this. Also if there are any other options I should consider then
> please let me know.
>
> For option B, the timer node would look like ...
>
> + timer12: timer@48304000 {
> + compatible = "ti,omap3-timer";
> + ti,hwmods = "timer12";
> + ti,timer-alwon;
> + ti,timer-secure;
> + };
>
> I would then add the following function to the omap timer code to search
> for any timers with the "ti,timer-secure" on a secure device and enable
> the OF_DYNAMIC option. Right now it is only timer 12 on OMAP3 that
> requires this, but I have made the function generic so that it could
> handle other devices (but none exist today that I am aware of).
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/timer.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/timer.c
> index 8c22a8e..5e38946 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/timer.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/timer.c
> @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@
> #include <linux/clocksource.h>
> #include <linux/clockchips.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
>
> #include <asm/mach/time.h>
> #include <plat/dmtimer.h>
> @@ -482,6 +483,35 @@ static int __init omap2_dm_timer_init(void)
> }
> arch_initcall(omap2_dm_timer_init);
>
> +static struct of_device_id omap3_timer_match[] __initdata = {
> + { .compatible = "ti,omap3-timer", },
> + { }
> +};
> +
> +/**
> + * omap_dmtimer_init - initialisation function when device tree is used
> + *
> + * For secure OMAP3 devices, timers with property "ti,timer-secure" cannot
> + * be used by the kernel as they are reserved. Therefore, to prevent the
> + * kernel registering these devices remove them dynamically from the device
> + * tree on boot.
> + */
> +void __init omap_dmtimer_init(void)
> +{
> + struct device_node *np;
> +
> + if (!cpu_is_omap34xx())
> + return;
> +
> + /* If we are a secure device, remove any secure timer nodes */
> + if ((omap_type() == OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_GP)) {
Oops! Bug in the above code. Meant to be ...
if (omap_type() != OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_GP)
> + for_each_matching_node(np, omap3_timer_match) {
> + if (of_get_property(np, "ti,timer-secure", NULL))
> + of_detach_node(np);
> + }
> + }
> +}
Cheers
Jon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
