lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: [Tee-dev] [PATCH v1 12/14] tee: optee: enable dynamic SHM support
From
Date


On 9/28/17 1:04 PM, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
> From: Volodymyr Babchuk <vlad.babchuk@gmail.com>
>
> Previous patches added various features that are needed for dynamic SHM.
> Dynamic SHM allows Normal World to share any buffers with OP-TEE.
> While original design suggested to use pre-allocated region (usually of
> 1M to 2M of size), this new approach allows to use all non-secure RAM for
> command buffers, RPC allocations and TA parameters.
>
> This patch checks capability OPTEE_SMC_SEC_CAP_DYNAMIC_SHM. If it was set
> by OP-TEE, then kernel part of OP-TEE will use kernel page allocator
> to allocate command buffers. Also it will set TEE_GEN_CAP_REG_MEM
> capability to tell userspace that it supports shared memory registration.
>
> Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk <vlad.babchuk@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/tee/optee/core.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tee/optee/core.c b/drivers/tee/optee/core.c
> index 8e012ea..e8fd9af 100644
> --- a/drivers/tee/optee/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/tee/optee/core.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
> #include <linux/uaccess.h>
> #include "optee_private.h"
> #include "optee_smc.h"
> +#include "shm_pool.h"
>
> #define DRIVER_NAME "optee"
>
> @@ -227,6 +228,10 @@ static void optee_get_version(struct tee_device *teedev,
> .impl_caps = TEE_OPTEE_CAP_TZ,
> .gen_caps = TEE_GEN_CAP_GP,
> };
> + struct optee *optee = tee_get_drvdata(teedev);
> +
> + if (optee->sec_caps & OPTEE_SMC_SEC_CAP_DYNAMIC_SHM)
> + v.gen_caps |= TEE_GEN_CAP_REG_MEM;
> *vers = v;
> }
>
> @@ -405,21 +410,22 @@ static bool optee_msg_exchange_capabilities(optee_invoke_fn *invoke_fn,
> }
>
> static struct tee_shm_pool *
> -optee_config_shm_memremap(optee_invoke_fn *invoke_fn, void **memremaped_shm)
> +optee_config_shm_memremap(optee_invoke_fn *invoke_fn, void **memremaped_shm,
> + u32 sec_caps)
> {
> union {
> struct arm_smccc_res smccc;
> struct optee_smc_get_shm_config_result result;
> } res;
> - struct tee_shm_pool *pool;
> unsigned long vaddr;
> phys_addr_t paddr;
> size_t size;
> phys_addr_t begin;
> phys_addr_t end;
> void *va;
> - struct tee_shm_pool_mem_info priv_info;
> - struct tee_shm_pool_mem_info dmabuf_info;
> + struct tee_shm_pool_mgr *priv_mgr;
> + struct tee_shm_pool_mgr *dmabuf_mgr;
> + void *rc;
>
> invoke_fn(OPTEE_SMC_GET_SHM_CONFIG, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, &res.smccc);
> if (res.result.status != OPTEE_SMC_RETURN_OK) {
> @@ -449,22 +455,49 @@ optee_config_shm_memremap(optee_invoke_fn *invoke_fn, void **memremaped_shm)
> }
> vaddr = (unsigned long)va;
>
> - priv_info.vaddr = vaddr;
> - priv_info.paddr = paddr;
> - priv_info.size = OPTEE_SHM_NUM_PRIV_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE;
> - dmabuf_info.vaddr = vaddr + OPTEE_SHM_NUM_PRIV_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE;
> - dmabuf_info.paddr = paddr + OPTEE_SHM_NUM_PRIV_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE;
> - dmabuf_info.size = size - OPTEE_SHM_NUM_PRIV_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE;
> -
> - pool = tee_shm_pool_alloc_res_mem(&priv_info, &dmabuf_info);
> - if (IS_ERR(pool)) {
> - memunmap(va);
> - goto out;

Now that you removed the call to tee_shm_pool_alloc_res_mem() it is dead
code and no longer used. Do we still need tee_shm_pool_alloc_res_mem at
all?

> + /*
> + * If OP-TEE can work with unregistered SHM, we will use own pool
> + * for private shm
> + */
> + if (sec_caps & OPTEE_SMC_SEC_CAP_DYNAMIC_SHM) {
> + rc = optee_shm_pool_alloc_pages();
> + if (IS_ERR(rc))
> + goto err_memunmap;
> + priv_mgr = rc;
> + } else {
> + const size_t sz = OPTEE_SHM_NUM_PRIV_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE;
> +
> + rc = tee_shm_pool_mgr_alloc_res_mem(vaddr, paddr, sz,
> + 3 /* 8 bytes aligned */);
> + if (IS_ERR(rc))
> + goto err_memunmap;
> + priv_mgr = rc;
> +
> + vaddr += sz;
> + paddr += sz;
> + size -= sz;
> }
>
> + rc = tee_shm_pool_mgr_alloc_res_mem(vaddr, paddr, size, PAGE_SHIFT);
> + if (IS_ERR(rc))
> + goto err_free_priv_mgr;
> + dmabuf_mgr = rc;
> +
> + rc = tee_shm_pool_alloc(priv_mgr, dmabuf_mgr);
> + if (IS_ERR(rc))
> + goto err_free_dmabuf_mgr;
> +
> *memremaped_shm = va;
> -out:
> - return pool;
> +
> + return rc;
> +
> +err_free_dmabuf_mgr:
> + tee_shm_pool_mgr_destroy(dmabuf_mgr);
> +err_free_priv_mgr:
> + tee_shm_pool_mgr_destroy(priv_mgr);
> +err_memunmap:
> + memunmap(va);
> + return rc;
> }

This function now mixes dynamic and shared memory based allocation in a way that
only applies to certain cases.

We're going to have the following cases:
-Linux OP-TEE driver sees only static shared memory advertised (older versions
of OP-TEE)
-Linux OP-TEE driver sees only dynamic shared memory advertised (e.g. a guest
kernel in a VM)
-Linux OP-TEE driver sees both static and dynamic memory advertised

We are not handling the 'only dynamic shared memory' case currently and this code
is going to have to be refactored again to support that. Since we are substantially
re-working it anyway here, why don't we support all the cases.

It seems like we need logic along the lines of:

invoke_fn(OPTEE_SMC_GET_SHM_CONFIG, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, &res.smccc);
if (res.result.status == OPTEE_SMC_RETURN_OK)
optee_static_shm = true;
else
optee_static_shm = false;

if (sec_caps & OPTEE_SMC_SEC_CAP_DYNAMIC_SHM)
optee_dynamic_shm = true;
else
optee_dynamic_shm = false;

/* allocate private pool */
if (optee_dynamic_shm) {
rc = optee_shm_pool_alloc_pages();
priv_mgr = rc;
} else {
rc = tee_shm_pool_mgr_alloc_res_mem(vaddr, paddr, sz, 3);
priv_mgr = rc;
}

/* allocate dmabuf pool */
if (optee_dynamic_shm && !optee_static_shm) {
dmabuf_mgr = NULL;
} else {
rc = tee_shm_pool_mgr_alloc_res_mem(vaddr, paddr, size, PAGE_SHIFT);
dmabuf_mgr = rc;
}

rc = tee_shm_pool_alloc(priv_mgr, dmabuf_mgr);

>
> /* Simple wrapper functions to be able to use a function pointer */
> @@ -542,7 +575,7 @@ static struct optee *optee_probe(struct device_node *np)
> if (!(sec_caps & OPTEE_SMC_SEC_CAP_HAVE_RESERVED_SHM))
> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);

We should remove the above assumption that there must be static shared memory. It
shouldn't be an error.

Thanks,
Stuart

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-03 18:06    [W:0.291 / U:0.544 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site