-----Original Message----- From: York Sun [mailto:yorksun@freescale.com] Sent: 2015年12月3日 0:00 To: Hou Zhiqiang-B48286; U-Boot Mailing List Cc: Pan Lijun-B44306; Hu Mingkai-B21284; Sharma Bhupesh-B45370; Gong Qianyu-B52263; Tom Rini; Li Yang-Leo-R58472; Albert Aribaud; Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579; Wang Huan-B18965 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] armv8: fsl-layerscape: Make DDR non secure in MMU tables
On 12/01/2015 10:38 PM, Hou Zhiqiang-B48286 wrote:
<snip>
/* Invalidate all table entries */ memset(level0_table, 0, PGTABLE_SIZE); @@ -269,6 +344,22 @@ static inline void final_mmu_setup(void) &final_mmu_table[i]); } }
- /* Set the secure memory to secure in MMU */ #ifdef
+CONFIG_SYS_MEM_RESERVE_SECURE
- if (gd->secure_ram & MEM_RESERVE_SECURE_MAINTAINED) { #ifdef
+CONFIG_FSL_LSCH3
level2_table_secure = level2_table1 + 512; #elif+defined(CONFIG_FSL_LSCH2)
level2_table_secure = level2_table2 + 512; #endif/* update tlb pointer */gd->arch.tlb_addr = gd->secure_ram & ~0x3;The memory reserved for mmu table was lost? If it's better to record it
and use for non-sec mmu table?
That can be arranged.
If this func is called from non-secure state, for example EL2, the
secure memory cannot be accessed and the PMD_SECT_NS bit should be cleared.
We need to setup secure memory at EL3 to have secure memory to begin with. But you have a point here. Will look into it.
Yes, this func is called at EL3 for now, it is a assumption for this func. I mean we'd better make it a API that can be invoked at both EL3 and EL2 to setup the MMU table. And do you know if the EL1 should be taken into account in u-boot?
Thanks, Zhiqiang