Adding this driver as platform device and only for RX-51 until somebody test if
it working also on other OMAP3 HS devices and until there will be generic ARM
way to deal with SMC calls.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com>
[tony@atomide.com: folded in the clock alias change]
Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Closed and signed Nokia X-Loader bootloader stored in RX-51 nand does not set
IBE bit in ACTLR and starting kernel in non-secure mode. So direct write to
ACTLR by our kernel does not working and the code for ARM errata 430973 in
commit 7ce236fcd6 that sets IBE bit is a noop.
In order to have workaround for ARM errata 430973 from non-secure world on
RX-51 we needs Secure Monitor Call to set IBE BIT in ACTLR.
This patch adds RX-51 specific secure support code and sets IBE bit in ACTLR
during board init code for ARM errata 430973 workaround.
Note that new function rx51_secure_dispatcher() differs from existing
omap_secure_dispatcher(). It calling omap_smc3() and param[0] is nargs+1.
ARM errata 430973 workaround is needed for thumb-2 ISA compiled userspace
binaries. Without this workaround thumb-2 binaries crashing. So with this
patch it is possible to recompile and run applications/binaries with thumb-2
ISA on RX-51.
Signed-off-by: Ivaylo Dimitrov <freemangordon@abv.bg>
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Moving plat/omap-secure.h locally to mach-omap2/
as part of single zImage work
Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
memblock_steal tries to reserve physical memory during boot.
When the requested size is not aligned on the section size
then, the remaining memory available for lowmem becomes
unaligned on the section boundary. There is a issue with this,
which is discussed in the thread below.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/28/112
The final conclusion from the thread seems to
be align the memblock_steal calls on the SECTION boundary.
The issue comes out when LPAE is enabled, where the
section size is 2MB.
Boot tested this on OMAP5 evm with and without LPAE.
Signed-off-by: R Sricharan <r.sricharan@ti.com>
Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Several C files in arch/arm/mach-omap* and arch/arm/plat-omap declare
functions that are used by other files, but don't include the header
file where the prototype is declared. This results in the following
warnings from sparse:
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:114:5: warning: symbol 'omap_irq_pending' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:186:13: warning: symbol 'omap2_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:191:13: warning: symbol 'omap3_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:196:13: warning: symbol 'ti81xx_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:233:39: warning: symbol 'omap2_intc_handle_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:242:6: warning: symbol 'omap_intc_save_context' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:265:6: warning: symbol 'omap_intc_restore_context' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:291:6: warning: symbol 'omap3_intc_suspend' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:297:6: warning: symbol 'omap3_intc_prepare_idle' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:306:6: warning: symbol 'omap3_intc_resume_idle' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/irq.c:312:39: warning: symbol 'omap3_intc_handle_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-secure.c:59:12: warning: symbol 'omap_secure_ram_reserve_memblock' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-zoom-display.c:133:13: warning: symbol 'zoom_display_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/plat-omap/common.c:73:13: warning: symbol 'omap_init_consistent_dma_size' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap1/irq.c:61:5: warning: symbol 'omap_irq_flags' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap1/irq.c:179:13: warning: symbol 'omap1_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
arch/arm/mach-omap1/reset.c:11:6: warning: symbol 'omap1_restart' was not declared. Should it be static?
Fix by including the appropriate header files.
Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Cc: Senthilvadivu Guruswamy <svadivu@ti.com>
Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Several platforms are now using the memblock_alloc+memblock_free+
memblock_remove trick to obtain memory which won't be mapped in the
kernel's page tables. Most platforms do this (correctly) in the
->reserve callback. However, OMAP has started to call these functions
outside of this callback, and this is extremely unsafe - memory will
not be unmapped, and could well be given out after memblock is no
longer responsible for its management.
So, provide arm_memblock_steal() to perform this function, and ensure
that it panic()s if it is used inappropriately. Convert everyone
over, including OMAP.
As a result, OMAP with OMAP4_ERRATA_I688 enabled will panic on boot
with this change. Mark this option as BROKEN and make it depend on
BROKEN. OMAP needs to be fixed, or 137d105d50 (ARM: OMAP4: Fix
errata i688 with MPU interconnect barriers.) reverted until such
time it can be fixed correctly.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Allocate the memory to save secure ram context which needs
to be done when MPU is hitting OFF mode.
The ROM code expects a physical address to this memory
and hence use memblock APIs to reserve this memory as part
of .reserve() callback. Maximum size as per secure RAM requirements
is allocated.
To keep omap1 build working, omap-secure.h file is created
under plat-omap directory.
Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Acked-by: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@ti.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Tested-by: Vishwanath BS <vishwanath.bs@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
On OMAP secure/emulation devices, certain APIs are exported by secure
code. Add an infrastructure so that relevant operations on secure
devices can be implemented using it.
While at this, rename omap44xx-smc.S to omap-smc.S since the common APIs
can be used on other OMAP's too.
Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Acked-by: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@ti.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Tested-by: Vishwanath BS <vishwanath.bs@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Pali Rohár