Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-88954-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Message-ID: <6a3e3071-f8cd-66b4-99a0-427f7e11177a@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 10:49:57 -0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.15.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 11/12] firmware: qcom: scm: clarify the comment in
 qcom_scm_pas_init_image()
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski
	<brgl@bgdev.pl>
CC: Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski
	<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
        Guru Das Srinagesh
	<quic_gurus@quicinc.com>,
        Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>,
        "Maximilian
 Luz" <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>,
        Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>,
        "Srini
 Kandagatla" <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        <kernel@quicinc.com>,
        "Bartosz
 Golaszewski" <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>,
        Deepti Jaggi
	<quic_djaggi@quicinc.com>
References: <20240205182810.58382-1-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <20240205182810.58382-12-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <ihz4jczbhn3gdcs6nkgnzpyv3577ebd73qbkynw6jz7ciy4fu3@kxqu7olrrely>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Prasad Sodagudi <quic_psodagud@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <ihz4jczbhn3gdcs6nkgnzpyv3577ebd73qbkynw6jz7ciy4fu3@kxqu7olrrely>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


On 2/17/2024 7:50 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 07:28:09PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>>
>> The "memory protection" mechanism mentioned in the comment is the SHM
>> Bridge. This is also the reason why we do not convert this call to using
>> the TZ memory allocator.
>>
> No, this mechanism predates shmbridge.
Yes. PIL calls are there for very long time and shm bridge concept is 
introduced later.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>> Tested-by: Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com> # sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s
>> Tested-by: Deepti Jaggi <quic_djaggi@quicinc.com> #sa8775p-ride
>> Reviewed-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c | 10 +++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
>> index 839773270a21..7ba5cff6e4e7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
>> @@ -563,9 +563,13 @@ int qcom_scm_pas_init_image(u32 peripheral, const void *metadata, size_t size,
>>   	struct qcom_scm_res res;
>>   
>>   	/*
>> -	 * During the scm call memory protection will be enabled for the meta
>> -	 * data blob, so make sure it's physically contiguous, 4K aligned and
>> -	 * non-cachable to avoid XPU violations.
> What this is saying is that the memory will be made unaccessible to
> Linux, so it needs to be contiguous and aligned.

Based on my understanding,  this buffer has to be  physically 
contiguous, 4K aligned and non-cachable to avoid XPU violations.

We should keep this comment

>
>> +	 * During the SCM call the hypervisor will make the buffer containing
>> +	 * the program data into an SHM Bridge.
> Are you saying that the hypervisor will convert this memory to a
> shmbridge, and then pass it to TrustZone?
Yes.  Specifically for PIL calls hyp is creating shm bridge for 
buffers/regions on behalf of Linux/NS-EL1.
>
>> This is why we exceptionally
>> +	 * must not use the TrustZone memory allocator here as - depending on
>> +	 * Kconfig - it may already use the SHM Bridge mechanism internally.
>> +	 *
> "it may already"? You describe above that we shouldn't pass shmbridge
> memory, and the other case never deals with shmbridges. So, I think you
> can omit this part.
>
>> +	 * If we pass a buffer that is already part of an SHM Bridge to this
>> +	 * call, it will fail.
> Could this be because the consumer of this buffer operates in EL2, and
> not TZ?
These buffers are consumed by TZ only and not by EL2.  hyp creating the 
required bridges for pil buffers.
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
>
>>   	 */
>>   	mdata_buf = dma_alloc_coherent(__scm->dev, size, &mdata_phys,
>>   				       GFP_KERNEL);
>> -- 
>> 2.40.1
>>