Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] dma-buf: heaps: add Linaro restricted dmabuf heap support

From: T.J. Mercier
Date: Wed Sep 04 2024 - 17:42:54 EST

Next message: Paul Menzel: "Re: failed to remove key (0, ce:ce:1e:27:bb:e0) from hardware (-110) (ETIMEDOUT)"
Previous message: Javier Carrasco: "Re: [PATCH v2 20/22] Input: regulator-haptic - use guard notation when acquiring mutex"
In reply to: Jens Wiklander: "Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] dma-buf: heaps: add Linaro restricted dmabuf heap support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 2:44 AM Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 7:50 PM T.J. Mercier <tjmercier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 12:04 AM Jens Wiklander
> > <jens.wiklander@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add a Linaro restricted heap using the linaro,restricted-heap bindings
> > > implemented based on the generic restricted heap.
> > >
> > > The bindings defines a range of physical restricted memory. The heap
> > > manages this address range using genalloc. The allocated dma-buf file
> > > descriptor can later be registered with the TEE subsystem for later use
> > > via Trusted Applications in the secure world.
> > >
> > > Co-developed-by: Olivier Masse <olivier.masse@xxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Masse <olivier.masse@xxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig | 10 ++
> > > drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Makefile | 1 +
> > > .../dma-buf/heaps/restricted_heap_linaro.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 176 insertions(+)
> > > create mode 100644 drivers/dma-buf/heaps/restricted_heap_linaro.c
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig
> > > index 58903bc62ac8..82e2c5d09242 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Kconfig
> > > @@ -28,3 +28,13 @@ config DMABUF_HEAPS_RESTRICTED_MTK
> > > help
> > > Enable restricted dma-buf heaps for MediaTek platform. This heap is backed by
> > > TEE client interfaces. If in doubt, say N.
> > > +
> > > +config DMABUF_HEAPS_RESTRICTED_LINARO
> > > + bool "Linaro DMA-BUF Restricted Heap"
> > > + depends on DMABUF_HEAPS_RESTRICTED
> > > + help
> > > + Choose this option to enable the Linaro restricted dma-buf heap.
> > > + The restricted heap pools are defined according to the DT. Heaps
> > > + are allocated in the pools using gen allocater.
> > > + If in doubt, say N.
> > > +
> > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Makefile b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Makefile
> > > index 0028aa9d875f..66b2f67c47b5 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Makefile
> > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/Makefile
> > > @@ -2,4 +2,5 @@
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_DMABUF_HEAPS_CMA) += cma_heap.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_DMABUF_HEAPS_RESTRICTED) += restricted_heap.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_DMABUF_HEAPS_RESTRICTED_MTK) += restricted_heap_mtk.o
> > > +obj-$(CONFIG_DMABUF_HEAPS_RESTRICTED_LINARO) += restricted_heap_linaro.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_DMABUF_HEAPS_SYSTEM) += system_heap.o
> > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/restricted_heap_linaro.c b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/restricted_heap_linaro.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..4b08ed514023
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/restricted_heap_linaro.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > +/*
> > > + * DMABUF secure heap exporter
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright 2021 NXP.
> > > + * Copyright 2024 Linaro Limited.
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "rheap_linaro: " fmt
> > > +
> > > +#include <linux/dma-buf.h>
> > > +#include <linux/err.h>
> > > +#include <linux/genalloc.h>
> > > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > > +#include <linux/of.h>
> > > +#include <linux/of_fdt.h>
> > > +#include <linux/of_reserved_mem.h>
> > > +#include <linux/scatterlist.h>
> > > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > > +
> > > +#include "restricted_heap.h"
> > > +
> > > +#define MAX_HEAP_COUNT 2
> >
> > Are multiple supported because of what Cyrille mentioned here about permissions?
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/DBBPR04MB7514E006455AEA407041E4F788709@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> Yes, I kept that as is.

Ok thanks.

> > So this is just some arbitrary limit? I'd prefer to have some sort of
> > documentation about this.
>
> How about removing the limit and using dynamic allocation instead?

That works too!

>
> Thanks,
> Jens
>
> >
> >
> > > +#define HEAP_NAME_LEN 32
> > > +
> > > +struct resmem_restricted {
> > > + phys_addr_t base;
> > > + phys_addr_t size;
> > > +
> > > + char name[HEAP_NAME_LEN];
> > > +
> > > + bool no_map;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static struct resmem_restricted restricted_data[MAX_HEAP_COUNT] = {0};
> > > +static unsigned int restricted_data_count;
> > > +
> > > +static int linaro_restricted_memory_allocate(struct restricted_heap *heap,
> > > + struct restricted_buffer *buf)
> > > +{
> > > + struct gen_pool *pool = heap->priv_data;
> > > + unsigned long pa;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + buf->size = ALIGN(buf->size, PAGE_SIZE);
> > > + pa = gen_pool_alloc(pool, buf->size);
> > > + if (!pa)
> > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > +
> > > + ret = sg_alloc_table(&buf->sg_table, 1, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (ret) {
> > > + gen_pool_free(pool, pa, buf->size);
> > > + return ret;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + sg_set_page(buf->sg_table.sgl, phys_to_page(pa), buf->size, 0);
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void linaro_restricted_memory_free(struct restricted_heap *heap,
> > > + struct restricted_buffer *buf)
> > > +{
> > > + struct gen_pool *pool = heap->priv_data;
> > > + struct scatterlist *sg;
> > > + unsigned int i;
> > > +
> > > + for_each_sg(buf->sg_table.sgl, sg, buf->sg_table.nents, i)
> > > + gen_pool_free(pool, page_to_phys(sg_page(sg)), sg->length);
> > > + sg_free_table(&buf->sg_table);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static const struct restricted_heap_ops linaro_restricted_heap_ops = {
> > > + .alloc = linaro_restricted_memory_allocate,
> > > + .free = linaro_restricted_memory_free,
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static int add_heap(struct resmem_restricted *mem)
> > > +{
> > > + struct restricted_heap *heap;
> > > + struct gen_pool *pool;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + if (mem->base == 0 || mem->size == 0) {
> > > + pr_err("restricted_data base or size is not correct\n");
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + heap = kzalloc(sizeof(*heap), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!heap)
> > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > +
> > > + pool = gen_pool_create(PAGE_SHIFT, -1);
> > > + if (!pool) {
> > > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > + goto err_free_heap;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + ret = gen_pool_add(pool, mem->base, mem->size, -1);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + goto err_free_pool;
> > > +
> > > + heap->no_map = mem->no_map;
> > > + heap->priv_data = pool;
> > > + heap->name = mem->name;
> > > + heap->ops = &linaro_restricted_heap_ops;
> > > +
> > > + ret = restricted_heap_add(heap);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + goto err_free_pool;
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +
> > > +err_free_pool:
> > > + gen_pool_destroy(pool);
> > > +err_free_heap:
> > > + kfree(heap);
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int __init rmem_restricted_heap_setup(struct reserved_mem *rmem)
> > > +{
> > > + size_t len = HEAP_NAME_LEN;
> > > + const char *s;
> > > + bool no_map;
> > > +
> > > + if (WARN_ONCE(restricted_data_count >= MAX_HEAP_COUNT,
> > > + "Cannot handle more than %u restricted heaps\n",
> > > + MAX_HEAP_COUNT))
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + no_map = of_get_flat_dt_prop(rmem->fdt_node, "no-map", NULL);
> > > + s = strchr(rmem->name, '@');
> > > + if (s)
> > > + len = umin(s - rmem->name + 1, len);
> > > +
> > > + restricted_data[restricted_data_count].base = rmem->base;
> > > + restricted_data[restricted_data_count].size = rmem->size;
> > > + restricted_data[restricted_data_count].no_map = no_map;
> > > + strscpy(restricted_data[restricted_data_count].name, rmem->name, len);
> > > +
> > > + restricted_data_count++;
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +RESERVEDMEM_OF_DECLARE(linaro_restricted_heap, "linaro,restricted-heap",
> > > + rmem_restricted_heap_setup);
> > > +
> > > +static int linaro_restricted_heap_init(void)
> > > +{
> > > + unsigned int i;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 0; i < restricted_data_count; i++) {
> > > + ret = add_heap(&restricted_data[i]);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> > > + }
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +module_init(linaro_restricted_heap_init);
> > > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Linaro Restricted Heap Driver");
> > > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > >

Next message: Paul Menzel: "Re: failed to remove key (0, ce:ce:1e:27:bb:e0) from hardware (-110) (ETIMEDOUT)"
Previous message: Javier Carrasco: "Re: [PATCH v2 20/22] Input: regulator-haptic - use guard notation when acquiring mutex"
In reply to: Jens Wiklander: "Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] dma-buf: heaps: add Linaro restricted dmabuf heap support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]