Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: n900 in next-20170901
To:     Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
CC:     Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
        <pali.rohar@gmail.com>, <sre@kernel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>, <khilman@kernel.org>,
        <aaro.koskinen@iki.fi>, <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@gmail.com>,
        <patrikbachan@gmail.com>, <serge@hallyn.com>,
        <abcloriens@gmail.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
References: <20171109003639.GB23982@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <20171109035031.GA24383@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <20171109150854.GC28152@atomide.com>
 <20171110001315.GA29669@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <20171110032610.GJ28152@atomide.com>
 <20171110063727.GA32073@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <20171110153620.GO28152@atomide.com>
 <20171114063724.GA16969@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <20171114173719.GA28152@atomide.com>
 <5c885f60-bc8c-5f8e-dc81-57eacc57abc8@ti.com>
 <20171114194432.GB28152@atomide.com>
From:   Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>
Message-ID: <e07fae95-2125-2d50-7295-ad58f9710801@ti.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Nov 2017 22:01:33 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171114194432.GB28152@atomide.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 14/11/17 21:44, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com> [171114 19:34]:
>> I guess you could just use rx51_secure_dispatcher and ditch the
>> save_secure_ram_context call completely (and most of the other related
>> code)? That one would handle the cache also in a clean manner.
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>> rx51_secure_dispatcher(25, 0, FLAG_START_CRITICAL, 4,
>> __pa(omap3_secure_ram_storage), 0, 1, 1);
> 
> That's different, as rx51_secure_dispatcher does the following:
> 
> - Use arguments + 1 instead of 4, we currently use just 4
> - Disables local_irq and fiq, we are not doing that now
> - Flushes and invalidates cache range, we are not doing that
> - Calls omap_smc3 that only does mov r6, #0xff, and does not
>    do mov r2, #4
> - Missing nops after it's done
> 
> This just based on a quick look I did earlier. So just
> because of the extra work it does we don't want to do it
> even if it worked :)

Hmm ok, I was just thinking that all the extra flushes, irq disables 
etc. might be good to have in place, as a safeguard when entering secure 
mode. You might get glitches in certain conditions otherwise.

The things it is missing might just be clutter.

Anyway, that said, the changes you did look sane, but I might have 
cleaned it up a bit further. :)

-Tero

--
Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki

From 1584072093938467026@xxx Tue Nov 14 19:47:51 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1577552291468010502
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread