summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-secure.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2012-10-18ARM: OMAP: Move plat/omap-secure.h locally to mach-omap2Lokesh Vutla
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>
2012-10-08ARM: OMAP2+: Round of the carve out memory requested to section_sizeR Sricharan
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>
2012-09-20ARM: OMAP2+: Make omap-secure.h localTony Lindgren
This can be local to mach-omap2. Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
2012-04-13ARM: OMAP: add includes for missing prototypesPaul Walmsley
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>
2012-01-13ARM: Add arm_memblock_steal() to allocate memory away from the kernelRussell King
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>
2011-12-08ARM: OMAP: PM: Add support to allocate the memory for secure RAMSantosh Shilimkar
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>
2011-12-08ARM: OMAP: Add Secure HAL and monitor mode API infrastructure.Santosh Shilimkar
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>