Hello arm-soc maintainers,
Please pull this small patch converting the tee subsystem to use
pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages().
Thanks,
Jens
The following changes since commit ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936:
Linux 5.7-rc2 (2020-04-19 14:35:30 -0700)
are available in the Git repository at:
git://git.linaro.org:/people/jens.wiklander/linux-tee.git tags/tee-pin-user-pages-for-5.8
for you to fetch changes up to 37f6b4d5f47b600ec4ab6682c005a44a1bfca530:
tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages() (2020-05-26 10:42:41 +0200)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Converts tee subsystem to use pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages()
----------------------------------------------------------------
John Hubbard (1):
tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages()
drivers/tee/tee_shm.c | 12 +++---------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:12:59PM +0200, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> Hello arm-soc maintainers,
>
> Please pull this small patch converting the tee subsystem to use
> pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages().
>
> Thanks,
> Jens
>
> The following changes since commit ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936:
>
> Linux 5.7-rc2 (2020-04-19 14:35:30 -0700)
>
> are available in the Git repository at:
>
> git://git.linaro.org:/people/jens.wiklander/linux-tee.git tags/tee-pin-user-pages-for-5.8
>
> for you to fetch changes up to 37f6b4d5f47b600ec4ab6682c005a44a1bfca530:
>
> tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages() (2020-05-26 10:42:41 +0200)
Hi, I noticed this never got merged, but I don't see any follow-up here that
retracts it. Is it still pending merge such that I should queue it for v5.10?
-Olof
On 8/21/20 11:49 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:12:59PM +0200, Jens Wiklander wrote:
>> Hello arm-soc maintainers,
>>
>> Please pull this small patch converting the tee subsystem to use
>> pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages().
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jens
>>
>> The following changes since commit ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936:
>>
>> Linux 5.7-rc2 (2020-04-19 14:35:30 -0700)
>>
>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>
>> git://git.linaro.org:/people/jens.wiklander/linux-tee.git tags/tee-pin-user-pages-for-5.8
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to 37f6b4d5f47b600ec4ab6682c005a44a1bfca530:
>>
>> tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages() (2020-05-26 10:42:41 +0200)
>
> Hi, I noticed this never got merged, but I don't see any follow-up here that
> retracts it. Is it still pending merge such that I should queue it for v5.10?
>
I think so. I had marked it in my notes as "accepted, and the maintainer will
eventually merge it", and I left it at that. It's still desirable.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 12:58 PM John Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 8/21/20 11:49 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:12:59PM +0200, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> >> Hello arm-soc maintainers,
> >>
> >> Please pull this small patch converting the tee subsystem to use
> >> pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages().
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Jens
> >>
> >> The following changes since commit ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936:
> >>
> >> Linux 5.7-rc2 (2020-04-19 14:35:30 -0700)
> >>
> >> are available in the Git repository at:
> >>
> >> git://git.linaro.org:/people/jens.wiklander/linux-tee.git tags/tee-pin-user-pages-for-5.8
> >>
> >> for you to fetch changes up to 37f6b4d5f47b600ec4ab6682c005a44a1bfca530:
> >>
> >> tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages() (2020-05-26 10:42:41 +0200)
> >
> > Hi, I noticed this never got merged, but I don't see any follow-up here that
> > retracts it. Is it still pending merge such that I should queue it for v5.10?
> >
>
> I think so. I had marked it in my notes as "accepted, and the maintainer will
> eventually merge it", and I left it at that. It's still desirable.
>
Looks like it conflicts with some of the later work. Jens, given the
timelines here it's probably easiest all around if you rebase/respin
and send a fresh pull request. I could fix it up but you'd still need
to review that so the amount of work is probably less if you do it
directly.
-Olof
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:19 PM Olof Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 12:58 PM John Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/21/20 11:49 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:12:59PM +0200, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> > >> Hello arm-soc maintainers,
> > >>
> > >> Please pull this small patch converting the tee subsystem to use
> > >> pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages().
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Jens
> > >>
> > >> The following changes since commit ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936:
> > >>
> > >> Linux 5.7-rc2 (2020-04-19 14:35:30 -0700)
> > >>
> > >> are available in the Git repository at:
> > >>
> > >> git://git.linaro.org:/people/jens.wiklander/linux-tee.git tags/tee-pin-user-pages-for-5.8
> > >>
> > >> for you to fetch changes up to 37f6b4d5f47b600ec4ab6682c005a44a1bfca530:
> > >>
> > >> tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages() (2020-05-26 10:42:41 +0200)
> > >
> > > Hi, I noticed this never got merged, but I don't see any follow-up here that
> > > retracts it. Is it still pending merge such that I should queue it for v5.10?
> > >
> >
> > I think so. I had marked it in my notes as "accepted, and the maintainer will
> > eventually merge it", and I left it at that. It's still desirable.
> >
>
> Looks like it conflicts with some of the later work. Jens, given the
> timelines here it's probably easiest all around if you rebase/respin
> and send a fresh pull request. I could fix it up but you'd still need
> to review that so the amount of work is probably less if you do it
> directly.
Agree, I'll send a fresh pull request once we have this rebased.
The conflict is with the recently added call to get_kernel_pages()
when kernel memory is shared.
The conflict isn't trivial, I guess we need to handle the different
types of pages differently when releasing them.
John, would you mind rebasing and posting the patch again?
Thanks,
Jens
On 8/23/20 11:51 PM, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:19 PM Olof Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 12:58 PM John Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8/21/20 11:49 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:12:59PM +0200, Jens Wiklander wrote:
>>>>> Hello arm-soc maintainers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please pull this small patch converting the tee subsystem to use
>>>>> pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages().
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jens
>>>>>
>>>>> The following changes since commit ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936:
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux 5.7-rc2 (2020-04-19 14:35:30 -0700)
>>>>>
>>>>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>>>>
>>>>> git://git.linaro.org:/people/jens.wiklander/linux-tee.git tags/tee-pin-user-pages-for-5.8
>>>>>
>>>>> for you to fetch changes up to 37f6b4d5f47b600ec4ab6682c005a44a1bfca530:
>>>>>
>>>>> tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages() (2020-05-26 10:42:41 +0200)
>>>>
>>>> Hi, I noticed this never got merged, but I don't see any follow-up here that
>>>> retracts it. Is it still pending merge such that I should queue it for v5.10?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think so. I had marked it in my notes as "accepted, and the maintainer will
>>> eventually merge it", and I left it at that. It's still desirable.
>>>
>>
>> Looks like it conflicts with some of the later work. Jens, given the
>> timelines here it's probably easiest all around if you rebase/respin
>> and send a fresh pull request. I could fix it up but you'd still need
>> to review that so the amount of work is probably less if you do it
>> directly.
>
> Agree, I'll send a fresh pull request once we have this rebased.
> The conflict is with the recently added call to get_kernel_pages()
> when kernel memory is shared.
> The conflict isn't trivial, I guess we need to handle the different
> types of pages differently when releasing them.
> John, would you mind rebasing and posting the patch again?
>
Sure. Should it be against 5.9-rc2, or something else? I can do this in the morning,
about 10 hrs from now.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 9:18 AM John Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 8/23/20 11:51 PM, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:19 PM Olof Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 12:58 PM John Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 8/21/20 11:49 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:12:59PM +0200, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> >>>>> Hello arm-soc maintainers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please pull this small patch converting the tee subsystem to use
> >>>>> pin_user_pages() instead of get_user_pages().
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Jens
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The following changes since commit ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Linux 5.7-rc2 (2020-04-19 14:35:30 -0700)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> are available in the Git repository at:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> git://git.linaro.org:/people/jens.wiklander/linux-tee.git tags/tee-pin-user-pages-for-5.8
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for you to fetch changes up to 37f6b4d5f47b600ec4ab6682c005a44a1bfca530:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> tee: convert get_user_pages() --> pin_user_pages() (2020-05-26 10:42:41 +0200)
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi, I noticed this never got merged, but I don't see any follow-up here that
> >>>> retracts it. Is it still pending merge such that I should queue it for v5.10?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I think so. I had marked it in my notes as "accepted, and the maintainer will
> >>> eventually merge it", and I left it at that. It's still desirable.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Looks like it conflicts with some of the later work. Jens, given the
> >> timelines here it's probably easiest all around if you rebase/respin
> >> and send a fresh pull request. I could fix it up but you'd still need
> >> to review that so the amount of work is probably less if you do it
> >> directly.
> >
> > Agree, I'll send a fresh pull request once we have this rebased.
> > The conflict is with the recently added call to get_kernel_pages()
> > when kernel memory is shared.
> > The conflict isn't trivial, I guess we need to handle the different
> > types of pages differently when releasing them.
> > John, would you mind rebasing and posting the patch again?
> >
>
> Sure. Should it be against 5.9-rc2, or something else? I can do this in the morning,
> about 10 hrs from now.
5.9-rc2 sounds good.
Thanks,
Jens
This code was using get_user_pages*(), in a "Case 2" scenario
(DMA/RDMA), using the categorization from [1]. That means that it's
time to convert the get_user_pages*() + put_page() calls to
pin_user_pages*() + unpin_user_pages() calls.
There is some helpful background in [2]: basically, this is a small
part of fixing a long-standing disconnect between pinning pages, and
file systems' use of those pages.
[1] Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst
[2] "Explicit pinning of user-space pages":
https://lwn.net/Articles/807108/
Cc: Jens Wiklander <[email protected]>
Cc: Sumit Semwal <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
---
OK, this should be indentical to v1 [1], but now rebased against
Linux 5.9-rc2.
As before, I've compile-tested it again with a cross compiler, but that's
the only testing I'm set up for with CONFIG_TEE.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
thanks,
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
drivers/tee/tee_shm.c | 12 +++---------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
index 827ac3d0fea9..3c29e6c3ebe8 100644
--- a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
+++ b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
@@ -32,16 +32,13 @@ static void tee_shm_release(struct tee_shm *shm)
poolm->ops->free(poolm, shm);
} else if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_REGISTER) {
- size_t n;
int rc = teedev->desc->ops->shm_unregister(shm->ctx, shm);
if (rc)
dev_err(teedev->dev.parent,
"unregister shm %p failed: %d", shm, rc);
- for (n = 0; n < shm->num_pages; n++)
- put_page(shm->pages[n]);
-
+ unpin_user_pages(shm->pages, shm->num_pages);
kfree(shm->pages);
}
@@ -228,7 +225,7 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_register(struct tee_context *ctx, unsigned long addr,
}
if (flags & TEE_SHM_USER_MAPPED) {
- rc = get_user_pages_fast(start, num_pages, FOLL_WRITE,
+ rc = pin_user_pages_fast(start, num_pages, FOLL_WRITE,
shm->pages);
} else {
struct kvec *kiov;
@@ -292,16 +289,13 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_register(struct tee_context *ctx, unsigned long addr,
return shm;
err:
if (shm) {
- size_t n;
-
if (shm->id >= 0) {
mutex_lock(&teedev->mutex);
idr_remove(&teedev->idr, shm->id);
mutex_unlock(&teedev->mutex);
}
if (shm->pages) {
- for (n = 0; n < shm->num_pages; n++)
- put_page(shm->pages[n]);
+ unpin_user_pages(shm->pages, shm->num_pages);
kfree(shm->pages);
}
}
--
2.28.0
On 8/24/20 11:36 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
> This code was using get_user_pages*(), in a "Case 2" scenario
> (DMA/RDMA), using the categorization from [1]. That means that it's
> time to convert the get_user_pages*() + put_page() calls to
> pin_user_pages*() + unpin_user_pages() calls.
>
> There is some helpful background in [2]: basically, this is a small
> part of fixing a long-standing disconnect between pinning pages, and
> file systems' use of those pages.
>
> [1] Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst
>
> [2] "Explicit pinning of user-space pages":
> https://lwn.net/Articles/807108/
>
> Cc: Jens Wiklander <[email protected]>
> Cc: Sumit Semwal <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> OK, this should be indentical to v1 [1], but now rebased against
> Linux 5.9-rc2.
>
...ohhh, wait, I should have read the earlier message from Jens more
carefully:
"The conflict isn't trivial, I guess we need to handle the different
types of pages differently when releasing them."
So it's not good to have a logically identical patch. argghhh. Let me see
how hard it is to track these memory types separately and handle the release
accordingly, just a sec.
Sorry about the false move here.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
> As before, I've compile-tested it again with a cross compiler, but that's
> the only testing I'm set up for with CONFIG_TEE.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
>
> thanks,
> John Hubbard
> NVIDIA
>
> drivers/tee/tee_shm.c | 12 +++---------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
> index 827ac3d0fea9..3c29e6c3ebe8 100644
> --- a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
> +++ b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
> @@ -32,16 +32,13 @@ static void tee_shm_release(struct tee_shm *shm)
>
> poolm->ops->free(poolm, shm);
> } else if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_REGISTER) {
> - size_t n;
> int rc = teedev->desc->ops->shm_unregister(shm->ctx, shm);
>
> if (rc)
> dev_err(teedev->dev.parent,
> "unregister shm %p failed: %d", shm, rc);
>
> - for (n = 0; n < shm->num_pages; n++)
> - put_page(shm->pages[n]);
> -
> + unpin_user_pages(shm->pages, shm->num_pages);
> kfree(shm->pages);
> }
>
> @@ -228,7 +225,7 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_register(struct tee_context *ctx, unsigned long addr,
> }
>
> if (flags & TEE_SHM_USER_MAPPED) {
> - rc = get_user_pages_fast(start, num_pages, FOLL_WRITE,
> + rc = pin_user_pages_fast(start, num_pages, FOLL_WRITE,
> shm->pages);
> } else {
> struct kvec *kiov;
> @@ -292,16 +289,13 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_register(struct tee_context *ctx, unsigned long addr,
> return shm;
> err:
> if (shm) {
> - size_t n;
> -
> if (shm->id >= 0) {
> mutex_lock(&teedev->mutex);
> idr_remove(&teedev->idr, shm->id);
> mutex_unlock(&teedev->mutex);
> }
> if (shm->pages) {
> - for (n = 0; n < shm->num_pages; n++)
> - put_page(shm->pages[n]);
> + unpin_user_pages(shm->pages, shm->num_pages);
> kfree(shm->pages);
> }
> }
>
v
This code was using get_user_pages*(), in a "Case 2" scenario
(DMA/RDMA), using the categorization from [1]. That means that it's
time to convert the get_user_pages*() + put_page() calls to
pin_user_pages*() + unpin_user_pages() calls.
Factor out a new, small release_registered_pages() function, in
order to consolidate the logic for discerning between
TEE_SHM_USER_MAPPED and TEE_SHM_KERNEL_MAPPED pages. This also
absorbs the kfree() call that is also required there.
There is some helpful background in [2]: basically, this is a small
part of fixing a long-standing disconnect between pinning pages, and
file systems' use of those pages.
[1] Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst
[2] "Explicit pinning of user-space pages":
https://lwn.net/Articles/807108/
Cc: Jens Wiklander <[email protected]>
Cc: Sumit Semwal <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
---
OK, one more try, this time actually handling the _USER_MAPPED vs.
_KERNEL_MAPPED pages!
thanks,
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
drivers/tee/tee_shm.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
index 827ac3d0fea9..00472f5ce22e 100644
--- a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
+++ b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
@@ -12,6 +12,22 @@
#include <linux/uio.h>
#include "tee_private.h"
+static void release_registered_pages(struct tee_shm *shm)
+{
+ if (shm->pages) {
+ if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_USER_MAPPED) {
+ unpin_user_pages(shm->pages, shm->num_pages);
+ } else {
+ size_t n;
+
+ for (n = 0; n < shm->num_pages; n++)
+ put_page(shm->pages[n]);
+ }
+
+ kfree(shm->pages);
+ }
+}
+
static void tee_shm_release(struct tee_shm *shm)
{
struct tee_device *teedev = shm->ctx->teedev;
@@ -32,17 +48,13 @@ static void tee_shm_release(struct tee_shm *shm)
poolm->ops->free(poolm, shm);
} else if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_REGISTER) {
- size_t n;
int rc = teedev->desc->ops->shm_unregister(shm->ctx, shm);
if (rc)
dev_err(teedev->dev.parent,
"unregister shm %p failed: %d", shm, rc);
- for (n = 0; n < shm->num_pages; n++)
- put_page(shm->pages[n]);
-
- kfree(shm->pages);
+ release_registered_pages(shm);
}
teedev_ctx_put(shm->ctx);
@@ -228,7 +240,7 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_register(struct tee_context *ctx, unsigned long addr,
}
if (flags & TEE_SHM_USER_MAPPED) {
- rc = get_user_pages_fast(start, num_pages, FOLL_WRITE,
+ rc = pin_user_pages_fast(start, num_pages, FOLL_WRITE,
shm->pages);
} else {
struct kvec *kiov;
@@ -292,18 +304,12 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_register(struct tee_context *ctx, unsigned long addr,
return shm;
err:
if (shm) {
- size_t n;
-
if (shm->id >= 0) {
mutex_lock(&teedev->mutex);
idr_remove(&teedev->idr, shm->id);
mutex_unlock(&teedev->mutex);
}
- if (shm->pages) {
- for (n = 0; n < shm->num_pages; n++)
- put_page(shm->pages[n]);
- kfree(shm->pages);
- }
+ release_registered_pages(shm);
}
kfree(shm);
teedev_ctx_put(ctx);
--
2.28.0
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 02:11:25PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> This code was using get_user_pages*(), in a "Case 2" scenario
> (DMA/RDMA), using the categorization from [1]. That means that it's
> time to convert the get_user_pages*() + put_page() calls to
> pin_user_pages*() + unpin_user_pages() calls.
>
> Factor out a new, small release_registered_pages() function, in
> order to consolidate the logic for discerning between
> TEE_SHM_USER_MAPPED and TEE_SHM_KERNEL_MAPPED pages. This also
> absorbs the kfree() call that is also required there.
>
> There is some helpful background in [2]: basically, this is a small
> part of fixing a long-standing disconnect between pinning pages, and
> file systems' use of those pages.
>
> [1] Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst
>
> [2] "Explicit pinning of user-space pages":
> https://lwn.net/Articles/807108/
>
> Cc: Jens Wiklander <[email protected]>
> Cc: Sumit Semwal <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> OK, one more try, this time actually handling the _USER_MAPPED vs.
> _KERNEL_MAPPED pages!
>
> thanks,
> John Hubbard
> NVIDIA
Looks good and it works too! :-) I've tested it on my Hikey board with
the OP-TEE test suite.
I'm picking this up.
Thanks,
Jens
On 8/25/20 1:32 AM, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 02:11:25PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
...
>> OK, one more try, this time actually handling the _USER_MAPPED vs.
>> _KERNEL_MAPPED pages!
>>
>> thanks,
>> John Hubbard
>> NVIDIA
>
> Looks good and it works too! :-) I've tested it on my Hikey board with
> the OP-TEE test suite.
> I'm picking this up.
>
Great! I see that I have, once again, somehow doubled up on the subject line:
"tee: convert convert ...". This particular typo just seems to stick to me. :)
If you get a chance to fix that up by changing it to just a single "convert"
I'd appreciate it.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:54 AM John Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 8/25/20 1:32 AM, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 02:11:25PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> ...
> >> OK, one more try, this time actually handling the _USER_MAPPED vs.
> >> _KERNEL_MAPPED pages!
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> John Hubbard
> >> NVIDIA
> >
> > Looks good and it works too! :-) I've tested it on my Hikey board with
> > the OP-TEE test suite.
> > I'm picking this up.
> >
>
> Great! I see that I have, once again, somehow doubled up on the subject line:
> "tee: convert convert ...". This particular typo just seems to stick to me. :)
>
> If you get a chance to fix that up by changing it to just a single "convert"
> I'd appreciate it.
Sure, no problem.
Cheers,
Jens