On 07/30/2013 12:02 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 01:54:16AM +0200, Andre Przywara wrote:
[...]
diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c b/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c index 1b6e0ac..7b0619e 100644 --- a/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c +++ b/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c @@ -34,6 +34,10 @@ #include <asm/bootm.h> #include <linux/compiler.h>
+#ifdef CONFIG_ARMV7_NONSEC +#include <asm/armv7.h> +#endif
DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
static struct tag *params;
@@ -186,6 +190,29 @@ static void setup_end_tag(bd_t *bd)
__weak void setup_board_tags(struct tag **in_params) {}
+static void do_nonsec_virt_switch(void) +{ +#ifdef CONFIG_ARMV7_NONSEC
- int ret;
- ret = armv7_switch_nonsec();
- switch (ret) {
- case NONSEC_VIRT_SUCCESS:
debug("entered non-secure state\n");break;- case NONSEC_ERR_NO_SEC_EXT:
printf("nonsec: Security extensions not implemented.\n");break;- case NONSEC_ERR_NO_GIC_ADDRESS:
printf("nonsec: could not determine GIC address.\n");break;- case NONSEC_ERR_GIC_ADDRESS_ABOVE_4GB:
printf("nonsec: PERIPHBASE is above 4 GB, no access.\n");break;- }
+#endif +}
I still don't get why you just don't make armv7_switch_nonsec a void and print the error when they occur... ???
My apologies for not elaborating on these comments I didn't incorporate:
So, I don't like the idea of marrying a low-level routine with high level output. I don't want to constraint the usage of the routine by requiring an output channel. Also some parts may not be fatal for all users - someone could just try to switch and then behave differently if that failed - without bothering the user. May seem a bit over-engineered, but I like it better this way ;-)
If that is a show-stopper for you, I can change it, of course.
Regards, Andre.