Oliver,
On 2/22/22 7:36 AM, Olivier Masse wrote:
Hi All,
Could we postpone to the next call ?
Yes we can discuss on March 7.
However I think you need to define what you want to discuss.
First of, there is nothing in your suggested DTS that tells Linux (or other OS) that it should not map the memory area. It looks to me as you should include the "no-map" property in your node.
How will the Linux video/graphics drivers refer to this node? I presume by phandle, right?
Are you setting any suggested naming convention for the node name (after you fix the node name to include @address)?
You are defining a compatible string in the node. The current suggestion is not in the spec. It could be "optee,sdp" if you get optee stakeholders to agree. What should be the definition of "optee,sdp". I presume it means secure data path but that could mean a ton of things. Will sdp always mean DRM protected media playback or could it include more?
Thanks, Bill
BR / Olivier
On mar., 2022-02-15 at 13:46 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
Caution: EXT Email
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:21 AM Bill Mills bill.mills@linaro.org wrote:
Rob,
Can you confirm for the DT call on Feb 21?
I'm on holiday on the 21st.
Oliver,
On 2/11/22 4:54 AM, Olivier Masse wrote:
Hi Bill,
NXP had a discussion with Linaro about this optee os issue:
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com...
Which is implemented by this first draft here:
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com...
Could we be part of the next Device Tree call to discuss about adding a reserved memory in optee os embedded DT ?
Thanks for bringing it up. I have skimmed the PR threads and the discussion seems to be:
- OP-TEE internal issues
- DT standards questions and issues
For the DT call we need to focus on #2 above. We will definitely need Rob for this discussion so we need to do it when he can join. (If we don't resolve the question in this email thread before then.)
Context for all:
SDP here is related to DRM protected playback of media streams.
Jens comment in PR:
So far we have managed to avoid defining our own bindings in OP-
TEE,
instead we've been able to reuse already established bindings.
With
this you're proposing something new. I'm not sure of the best
way of
doing such a thing. Are we sure there is nothing to reuse? If not: How should it be reviewed? Who should review it?
DTS in PR: /*
- Copyright (c) 2021, NXP. All rights reserved.
- SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
*/
/dts-v1/;
/ { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>;
reserved-memory { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <1>; sdp_mem { compatible = "optee-sdp"; reg = <0x3E800000 0x00400000>; }; };};
However it was modified after that.
Oliver: please reply to this thread (on list please) with the final DTS you are proposing. fix DT conventions and what are you doing with the no-map property if anything.
Is the memory above meant to be visible to NS world AND S world? Or is just for secure world.
Thanks, Bill
Best regards, Olivier Masse
-- Bill Mills Principal Technical Consultant, Linaro +1-240-643-0836 TZ: US Eastern Work Schedule: Tues/Wed/Thur _______________________________________________ boot-architecture mailing list -- boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org To unsubscribe send an email to boot-architecture-leave@lists.linaro.org
boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org
-
Bill Mills