Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 2/4] arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

2017-10-17 Thread Julien Grall 



On 17/10/17 18:22, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:

Hi Julien,

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 05:39:29PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:

Excuse me, looks like you skipped my thoughts about how to detect
TEE if we are not sure, that we are running on SMCCC-capable platform.

How do you think, is it appropriate to rely on DT?


I didn't have any opinion as long as it covers most of the TEE and does 
not make any assumption on the platform other than written in the ARM ARM.


I have no idea how Linux is doing the detection, it might be worth for 
you to have a look there.




[...]

@@ -673,6 +674,9 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int 
domcr_flags,
  if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && (rc = domain_vuart_init(d)) )
  goto fail;
+/* Notify TEE that new domain was created */
+tee_domain_create(d);


I am not a big fan to see this in arch_domain_create until we see how this
is going to fit with guest. For instance, will TEE be for every guests? What
would be the other necessary information to configure it?...

I think I'll call XSM in tee_domain_create() to check if this domain allowed
to work with TEE. I can't imagine what additional information will be needed.
This interface can be extended in the future, though.


You will never need to inform TEE that a new client (aka domain) is been
created, nor allocated memory for the TEE at domain creation in Xen?

Yes. You are right. But then there are another question: what to do
if tee_domain_create() failed? Prevent domain creation? Or create
domain anyways, but forbid it to call TEE?


I would expect TEE to not be enabled by default for guests. This would 
be user configurable. So if it requests TEE and it is not possible to 
instantiate one, then the domain creation should failed.





[...]


diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..7f7a846
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+/*
+ * xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
+ *
+ * Generic part of TEE mediator subsystem
+ *
+ * Volodymyr Babchuk 
+ * Copyright (c) 2017 EPAM Systems.
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
+ * published by the Free Software Foundation.
+ *
+ * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ */
+
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+
+/*
+ * According to ARM SMCCC (ARM DEN 0028B, page 17), service owner
+ * for generic TEE queries is 63.
+ */
+#define TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER 63
+
+#define ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_GET_TEE_UID  \
+ARM_SMCCC_CALL_VAL(ARM_SMCCC_FAST_CALL, \
+   ARM_SMCCC_CONV_32,   \
+   TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER,\
+   ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_CALL_UID)


This likely needs to be defined in smccc as AFAIU it is part of the SMCCC.

It only used there. I'm not sure if I should define it globally.


Maybe ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_GET_TEE_UID, but definitely
TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER should stick with the rest of the subsystem
definition in smccc.h.

Yes, will do in this way.


[...]


+printk("No TEE found\n");
+return;
+}
+
+parse_uid(resp, _uid);
+
+printk("TEE UID: 
%02x%02x%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x%02x%02x%02x%02x\n",
+   tee_uid.a[0 ], tee_uid.a[1 ], tee_uid.a[2 ], tee_uid.a[3 ],


Please no space before ]. This is making more confusing to read.

I put it for neat formatting. Probably, I can put double space after commas.
Will be okay?


That is that really important to have them? I mean, ok it is not going to be
neat but the format string is already ugly and it would not be too difficult
to read the arguments.

Dunno. As for me, it eases parsing. For example, it is easy to see that
all indexes are correct. But if this is inappropriate, I can remove all
extra spaces.


Well, if you are going to do a different probe than via SMCCC, then this 
discussion is not necessary as the printk would likely disappear.







+   tee_uid.a[4 ], tee_uid.a[5 ], tee_uid.a[6 ], tee_uid.a[7 ],
+   tee_uid.a[8 ], tee_uid.a[9 ], tee_uid.a[10], tee_uid.a[11],
+   tee_uid.a[12], tee_uid.a[13], tee_uid.a[14], tee_uid.a[15]);
+
+for ( desc = _steemediator; desc != _eteemediator; desc++ )


{


+if ( memcmp(>uid, _uid, sizeof(xen_uuid_t)) == 0 )
+{
+printk("Using TEE mediator for %sp\n", desc->name);
+mediator_ops = desc->ops;
+break;
+}


}


+
+if ( !mediator_ops )


A warning here would be useful.

Why? Platform is not obligued to have any TEE.


What do you mean? You can only

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 2/4] arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

2017-10-17 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk 
Hi Julien,

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 05:39:29PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:

Excuse me, looks like you skipped my thoughts about how to detect
TEE if we are not sure, that we are running on SMCCC-capable platform.

How do you think, is it appropriate to rely on DT?

[...]
> >>>@@ -673,6 +674,9 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int 
> >>>domcr_flags,
> >>>  if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && (rc = domain_vuart_init(d)) )
> >>>  goto fail;
> >>>+/* Notify TEE that new domain was created */
> >>>+tee_domain_create(d);
> >>
> >>I am not a big fan to see this in arch_domain_create until we see how this
> >>is going to fit with guest. For instance, will TEE be for every guests? What
> >>would be the other necessary information to configure it?...
> >I think I'll call XSM in tee_domain_create() to check if this domain allowed
> >to work with TEE. I can't imagine what additional information will be needed.
> >This interface can be extended in the future, though.
> 
> You will never need to inform TEE that a new client (aka domain) is been
> created, nor allocated memory for the TEE at domain creation in Xen?
Yes. You are right. But then there are another question: what to do
if tee_domain_create() failed? Prevent domain creation? Or create
domain anyways, but forbid it to call TEE?

> [...]
> 
> >>>diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
> >>>new file mode 100644
> >>>index 000..7f7a846
> >>>--- /dev/null
> >>>+++ b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
> >>>@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
> >>>+/*
> >>>+ * xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
> >>>+ *
> >>>+ * Generic part of TEE mediator subsystem
> >>>+ *
> >>>+ * Volodymyr Babchuk 
> >>>+ * Copyright (c) 2017 EPAM Systems.
> >>>+ *
> >>>+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> >>>+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> >>>+ * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> >>>+ *
> >>>+ * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> >>>+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> >>>+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> >>>+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
> >>>+ */
> >>>+
> >>>+#include 
> >>>+#include 
> >>>+#include 
> >>>+
> >>>+/*
> >>>+ * According to ARM SMCCC (ARM DEN 0028B, page 17), service owner
> >>>+ * for generic TEE queries is 63.
> >>>+ */
> >>>+#define TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER 63
> >>>+
> >>>+#define ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_GET_TEE_UID  \
> >>>+ARM_SMCCC_CALL_VAL(ARM_SMCCC_FAST_CALL, \
> >>>+   ARM_SMCCC_CONV_32,   \
> >>>+   TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER,\
> >>>+   ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_CALL_UID)
> >>
> >>This likely needs to be defined in smccc as AFAIU it is part of the SMCCC.
> >It only used there. I'm not sure if I should define it globally.
> 
> Maybe ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_GET_TEE_UID, but definitely
> TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER should stick with the rest of the subsystem
> definition in smccc.h.
Yes, will do in this way.

> [...]
> 
> >>>+printk("No TEE found\n");
> >>>+return;
> >>>+}
> >>>+
> >>>+parse_uid(resp, _uid);
> >>>+
> >>>+printk("TEE UID: 
> >>>%02x%02x%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x%02x%02x%02x%02x\n",
> >>>+   tee_uid.a[0 ], tee_uid.a[1 ], tee_uid.a[2 ], tee_uid.a[3 ],
> >>
> >>Please no space before ]. This is making more confusing to read.
> >I put it for neat formatting. Probably, I can put double space after commas.
> >Will be okay?
> 
> That is that really important to have them? I mean, ok it is not going to be
> neat but the format string is already ugly and it would not be too difficult
> to read the arguments.
Dunno. As for me, it eases parsing. For example, it is easy to see that
all indexes are correct. But if this is inappropriate, I can remove all
extra spaces.
> 
> >
> >>>+   tee_uid.a[4 ], tee_uid.a[5 ], tee_uid.a[6 ], tee_uid.a[7 ],
> >>>+   tee_uid.a[8 ], tee_uid.a[9 ], tee_uid.a[10], tee_uid.a[11],
> >>>+   tee_uid.a[12], tee_uid.a[13], tee_uid.a[14], tee_uid.a[15]);
> >>>+
> >>>+for ( desc = _steemediator; desc != _eteemediator; desc++ )
> >>
> >>{
> >>
> >>>+if ( memcmp(>uid, _uid, sizeof(xen_uuid_t)) == 0 )
> >>>+{
> >>>+printk("Using TEE mediator for %sp\n", desc->name);
> >>>+mediator_ops = desc->ops;
> >>>+break;
> >>>+}
> >>
> >>}
> >>
> >>>+
> >>>+if ( !mediator_ops )
> >>
> >>A warning here would be useful.
> >Why? Platform is not obligued to have any TEE.
> 
> What do you mean? You can only be here because the platform has TEE but Xen
> does not have any mediator. You actually print "no TEE found" a bit above.
> So why not printing for when Xen is unable to use it?
Ah, yes. This makes sense.

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 2/4] arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

2017-10-17 Thread Julien Grall 

On 17/10/17 17:22, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 02:00:32PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:

diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
index d46b98c..e1f112a 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -50,6 +50,14 @@ config HAS_ITS
  prompt "GICv3 ITS MSI controller support" if EXPERT = "y"
  depends on HAS_GICV3
+config ARM_TEE


The ARM in the title is a bit pointless. This Kconfig is only used for Arm
architecture.

Just plain TEE then?


Yes please.




+   bool "Enable TEE mediators support"
+   default n
+   depends on ARM


No need for that.

Right.


+   help
+ This option enables generic TEE mediators support. It allows guests
+ to access real TEE via one of TEE mediators implemented in XEN


Missing full stop.


+
  endmenu
  menu "ARM errata workaround via the alternative framework"
@@ -167,3 +175,5 @@ endmenu
  source "common/Kconfig"
  source "drivers/Kconfig"
+
+source "arch/arm/tee/Kconfig"
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
index ede21fd..2710e0e 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += arm64
  subdir-y += platforms
  subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += efi
  subdir-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi
+subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEE) += tee
  obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_ALTERNATIVE) += alternative.o
  obj-y += bootfdt.init.o
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
index 784ae39..3290d39 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
  #include 
  #include 
  #include 
+#include 
  #include 
  #include 
  #include 
@@ -673,6 +674,9 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int 
domcr_flags,
  if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && (rc = domain_vuart_init(d)) )
  goto fail;
+/* Notify TEE that new domain was created */
+tee_domain_create(d);


I am not a big fan to see this in arch_domain_create until we see how this
is going to fit with guest. For instance, will TEE be for every guests? What
would be the other necessary information to configure it?...

I think I'll call XSM in tee_domain_create() to check if this domain allowed
to work with TEE. I can't imagine what additional information will be needed.
This interface can be extended in the future, though.


You will never need to inform TEE that a new client (aka domain) is been 
created, nor allocated memory for the TEE at domain creation in Xen?


[...]


diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..7f7a846
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+/*
+ * xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
+ *
+ * Generic part of TEE mediator subsystem
+ *
+ * Volodymyr Babchuk 
+ * Copyright (c) 2017 EPAM Systems.
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
+ * published by the Free Software Foundation.
+ *
+ * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ */
+
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+
+/*
+ * According to ARM SMCCC (ARM DEN 0028B, page 17), service owner
+ * for generic TEE queries is 63.
+ */
+#define TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER 63
+
+#define ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_GET_TEE_UID  \
+ARM_SMCCC_CALL_VAL(ARM_SMCCC_FAST_CALL, \
+   ARM_SMCCC_CONV_32,   \
+   TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER,\
+   ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_CALL_UID)


This likely needs to be defined in smccc as AFAIU it is part of the SMCCC.

It only used there. I'm not sure if I should define it globally.


Maybe ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_GET_TEE_UID, but definitely 
TRUSTED_OS_GENERIC_API_OWNER should stick with the rest of the subsystem 
definition in smccc.h.


[...]


+printk("No TEE found\n");
+return;
+}
+
+parse_uid(resp, _uid);
+
+printk("TEE UID: 
%02x%02x%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x-%02x%02x%02x%02x%02x%02x\n",
+   tee_uid.a[0 ], tee_uid.a[1 ], tee_uid.a[2 ], tee_uid.a[3 ],


Please no space before ]. This is making more confusing to read.

I put it for neat formatting. Probably, I can put double space after commas.
Will be okay?


That is that really important to have them? I mean, ok it is not going 
to be neat but the format string is already ugly and it would not be too 
difficult to read the arguments.





+   tee_uid.a[4 ], tee_uid.a[5 ], tee_uid.a[6 ], tee_uid.a[7 ],
+   tee_uid.a[8 ], tee_uid.a[9 ], tee_uid.a[10], tee_uid.a[11],
+   tee_uid.a[12], tee_uid.a[13], tee_uid.a[14], tee_uid.a[15]);
+
+for ( desc = _steemediator; desc !=

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 2/4] arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

2017-10-17 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk 
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 02:00:32PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Volodymyr,
Hi Julien,

[...]
> >This is how it works: user can build XEN with multiple TEE mediators
> >(see the next patches, where OP-TEE mediator is introduced).
> >TEE mediator register self with REGISTER_TEE_MEDIATOR() macro in the
> >same way, as device drivers use DT_DEVICE_START()/DT_DEVICE_END()
> >macros.
> >In runtime, during initialization, XEN issues standard SMC to read
> >TEE UID. Using this UID it selects and initializes one of built-in
> >mediators. Then generic vSMC handler will call selected mediator
> >when it intercept SMC that belongs to TEE OS or TEE application.
> 
> As you may remember the discussion on the SMCCC support for guests, there
> are currently no way to know the SMCCC is present on the platform.
Ah, yes. Device tree, then.

> I don't think you can rely on the platform support SMCC nor fully
> implementing it. This also bring the question of does every TEE are
> supporting SMCCC?
Honestly, I don't know. I suppose that there can be TEEs the are not
compatible with SMCCC. Okay, instead of UID comparison in generic
framework, I can introduce probe() functions for each mediator.

On other hand, DT bindings, can work even better.
How about this: TEE mediator registers with DT_DEVICE_START() as
any other driver. If, during init() it finds compatible TEE,
then TEE mediator registers itself in TEE framework.
During registration it provides supported SMC fn ranges. This is for
case when TEE is not SMCCC-compatible and uses function numbers
outside ARM_SMCCC_OWNER_TRUSTED_OS range.

> >
> >Also, there are hooks for domain construction and destruction, so
> >TEE mediator can inform TEE about VM lifecycle.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk 
> >---
> >  MAINTAINERS   |   5 ++
> >  xen/arch/arm/Kconfig  |  10 
> >  xen/arch/arm/Makefile |   1 +
> >  xen/arch/arm/domain.c |   7 +++
> >  xen/arch/arm/setup.c  |   4 ++
> >  xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig  |   0
> >  xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile |   1 +
> >  xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c| 134 
> > ++
> >  xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c   |   5 ++
> >  xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S|   7 +++
> >  xen/include/asm-arm/tee.h |  79 +++
> >  11 files changed, 253 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig
> >  create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile
> >  create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
> >  create mode 100644 xen/include/asm-arm/tee.h
> >
> >diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> >index 77b1e11..ede00c5 100644
> >--- a/MAINTAINERS
> >+++ b/MAINTAINERS
> >@@ -357,6 +357,11 @@ F:  config/Stubdom.mk.in
> >  F: m4/stubdom.m4
> >  F: stubdom/
> >+TEE MEDIATORS
> >+M:  Volodymyr Babchuk 
> >+S:  Supported
> >+F:  xen/arch/arm/tee/*
> >+
> >  TOOLSTACK
> >  M: Ian Jackson 
> >  M: Wei Liu 
> >diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
> >index d46b98c..e1f112a 100644
> >--- a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
> >+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
> >@@ -50,6 +50,14 @@ config HAS_ITS
> >  prompt "GICv3 ITS MSI controller support" if EXPERT = "y"
> >  depends on HAS_GICV3
> >+config ARM_TEE
> 
> The ARM in the title is a bit pointless. This Kconfig is only used for Arm
> architecture.
Just plain TEE then?

> >+bool "Enable TEE mediators support"
> >+default n
> >+depends on ARM
> 
> No need for that.
Right.

> >+help
> >+  This option enables generic TEE mediators support. It allows guests
> >+  to access real TEE via one of TEE mediators implemented in XEN
> 
> Missing full stop.
> 
> >+
> >  endmenu
> >  menu "ARM errata workaround via the alternative framework"
> >@@ -167,3 +175,5 @@ endmenu
> >  source "common/Kconfig"
> >  source "drivers/Kconfig"
> >+
> >+source "arch/arm/tee/Kconfig"
> >diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
> >index ede21fd..2710e0e 100644
> >--- a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
> >+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
> >@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += arm64
> >  subdir-y += platforms
> >  subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += efi
> >  subdir-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi
> >+subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEE) += tee
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_ALTERNATIVE) += alternative.o
> >  obj-y += bootfdt.init.o
> >diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
> >index 784ae39..3290d39 100644
> >--- a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
> >+++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
> >@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
> >  #include 
> >  #include 
> >  #include 
> >+#include 
> >  #include 
> >  #include 
> >  #include 
> >@@ -673,6 +674,9 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int 
> >domcr_flags,
> >  if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && (rc = domain_vuart_init(d)) )
> >  goto fail;
> >+/* Notify TEE that new domain was created */
> >+tee_domain_create(d);
> 
> I am not a big fan to see this in arch_domain_create until we see how this
> is

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 2/4] arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

2017-10-16 Thread Julien Grall 

Hi Volodymyr,

On 11/10/17 20:01, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:

This patch adds basic framework for TEE mediators. Guests can't talk
to TEE directly, we need some entity that will intercept request
and decide what to do with them. "TEE mediaor" is a such entity.


s/mediaor/mediator/



This is how it works: user can build XEN with multiple TEE mediators
(see the next patches, where OP-TEE mediator is introduced).
TEE mediator register self with REGISTER_TEE_MEDIATOR() macro in the
same way, as device drivers use DT_DEVICE_START()/DT_DEVICE_END()
macros.
In runtime, during initialization, XEN issues standard SMC to read
TEE UID. Using this UID it selects and initializes one of built-in
mediators. Then generic vSMC handler will call selected mediator
when it intercept SMC that belongs to TEE OS or TEE application.


As you may remember the discussion on the SMCCC support for guests, 
there are currently no way to know the SMCCC is present on the platform.


I don't think you can rely on the platform support SMCC nor fully 
implementing it. This also bring the question of does every TEE are 
supporting SMCCC?




Also, there are hooks for domain construction and destruction, so
TEE mediator can inform TEE about VM lifecycle.

Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk 
---
  MAINTAINERS   |   5 ++
  xen/arch/arm/Kconfig  |  10 
  xen/arch/arm/Makefile |   1 +
  xen/arch/arm/domain.c |   7 +++
  xen/arch/arm/setup.c  |   4 ++
  xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig  |   0
  xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile |   1 +
  xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c| 134 ++
  xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c   |   5 ++
  xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S|   7 +++
  xen/include/asm-arm/tee.h |  79 +++
  11 files changed, 253 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig
  create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile
  create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
  create mode 100644 xen/include/asm-arm/tee.h

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 77b1e11..ede00c5 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -357,6 +357,11 @@ F: config/Stubdom.mk.in
  F:m4/stubdom.m4
  F:stubdom/
  
+TEE MEDIATORS

+M: Volodymyr Babchuk 
+S: Supported
+F: xen/arch/arm/tee/*
+
  TOOLSTACK
  M:Ian Jackson 
  M:Wei Liu 
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
index d46b98c..e1f112a 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -50,6 +50,14 @@ config HAS_ITS
  prompt "GICv3 ITS MSI controller support" if EXPERT = "y"
  depends on HAS_GICV3
  
+config ARM_TEE


The ARM in the title is a bit pointless. This Kconfig is only used for 
Arm architecture.



+   bool "Enable TEE mediators support"
+   default n
+   depends on ARM


No need for that.


+   help
+ This option enables generic TEE mediators support. It allows guests
+ to access real TEE via one of TEE mediators implemented in XEN


Missing full stop.


+
  endmenu
  
  menu "ARM errata workaround via the alternative framework"

@@ -167,3 +175,5 @@ endmenu
  source "common/Kconfig"
  
  source "drivers/Kconfig"

+
+source "arch/arm/tee/Kconfig"
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
index ede21fd..2710e0e 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += arm64
  subdir-y += platforms
  subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += efi
  subdir-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi
+subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEE) += tee
  
  obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_ALTERNATIVE) += alternative.o

  obj-y += bootfdt.init.o
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
index 784ae39..3290d39 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
  #include 
  #include 
  #include 
+#include 
  #include 
  #include 
  #include 
@@ -673,6 +674,9 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int 
domcr_flags,
  if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && (rc = domain_vuart_init(d)) )
  goto fail;
  
+/* Notify TEE that new domain was created */

+tee_domain_create(d);


I am not a big fan to see this in arch_domain_create until we see how 
this is going to fit with guest. For instance, will TEE be for every 
guests? What would be the other necessary information to configure it?...



+
  return 0;
  
  fail:

@@ -684,6 +688,9 @@ fail:
  
  void arch_domain_destroy(struct domain *d)

  {
+/* Notify TEE that domain is being destroyed */
+tee_domain_destroy(d);
+
  /* IOMMU page table is shared with P2M, always call
   * iommu_domain_destroy() before p2m_teardown().
   */
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/setup.c b/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
index 92f173b..8a4fcd8 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
  #include 
  #include 
  #include 
+#include 
  #include 
  #include 
  
@@ -846,6 +847,9 @@ void __init

[Xen-devel] [RFC 2/4] arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

2017-10-11 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk 
This patch adds basic framework for TEE mediators. Guests can't talk
to TEE directly, we need some entity that will intercept request
and decide what to do with them. "TEE mediaor" is a such entity.

This is how it works: user can build XEN with multiple TEE mediators
(see the next patches, where OP-TEE mediator is introduced).
TEE mediator register self with REGISTER_TEE_MEDIATOR() macro in the
same way, as device drivers use DT_DEVICE_START()/DT_DEVICE_END()
macros.
In runtime, during initialization, XEN issues standard SMC to read
TEE UID. Using this UID it selects and initializes one of built-in
mediators. Then generic vSMC handler will call selected mediator
when it intercept SMC that belongs to TEE OS or TEE application.

Also, there are hooks for domain construction and destruction, so
TEE mediator can inform TEE about VM lifecycle.

Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk 
---
 MAINTAINERS   |   5 ++
 xen/arch/arm/Kconfig  |  10 
 xen/arch/arm/Makefile |   1 +
 xen/arch/arm/domain.c |   7 +++
 xen/arch/arm/setup.c  |   4 ++
 xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig  |   0
 xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile |   1 +
 xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c| 134 ++
 xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c   |   5 ++
 xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S|   7 +++
 xen/include/asm-arm/tee.h |  79 +++
 11 files changed, 253 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig
 create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile
 create mode 100644 xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
 create mode 100644 xen/include/asm-arm/tee.h

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 77b1e11..ede00c5 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -357,6 +357,11 @@ F: config/Stubdom.mk.in
 F: m4/stubdom.m4
 F: stubdom/
 
+TEE MEDIATORS
+M: Volodymyr Babchuk 
+S: Supported
+F: xen/arch/arm/tee/*
+
 TOOLSTACK
 M: Ian Jackson 
 M: Wei Liu 
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
index d46b98c..e1f112a 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -50,6 +50,14 @@ config HAS_ITS
 prompt "GICv3 ITS MSI controller support" if EXPERT = "y"
 depends on HAS_GICV3
 
+config ARM_TEE
+   bool "Enable TEE mediators support"
+   default n
+   depends on ARM
+   help
+ This option enables generic TEE mediators support. It allows guests
+ to access real TEE via one of TEE mediators implemented in XEN
+
 endmenu
 
 menu "ARM errata workaround via the alternative framework"
@@ -167,3 +175,5 @@ endmenu
 source "common/Kconfig"
 
 source "drivers/Kconfig"
+
+source "arch/arm/tee/Kconfig"
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
index ede21fd..2710e0e 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += arm64
 subdir-y += platforms
 subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += efi
 subdir-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi
+subdir-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEE) += tee
 
 obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_ALTERNATIVE) += alternative.o
 obj-y += bootfdt.init.o
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
index 784ae39..3290d39 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
 #include 
 #include 
 #include 
+#include 
 #include 
 #include 
 #include 
@@ -673,6 +674,9 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int 
domcr_flags,
 if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && (rc = domain_vuart_init(d)) )
 goto fail;
 
+/* Notify TEE that new domain was created */
+tee_domain_create(d);
+
 return 0;
 
 fail:
@@ -684,6 +688,9 @@ fail:
 
 void arch_domain_destroy(struct domain *d)
 {
+/* Notify TEE that domain is being destroyed */
+tee_domain_destroy(d);
+
 /* IOMMU page table is shared with P2M, always call
  * iommu_domain_destroy() before p2m_teardown().
  */
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/setup.c b/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
index 92f173b..8a4fcd8 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
 #include 
 #include 
 #include 
+#include 
 #include 
 #include 
 
@@ -846,6 +847,9 @@ void __init start_xen(unsigned long boot_phys_offset,
  */
 apply_alternatives_all();
 
+/* Initialize TEE mediator */
+tee_init();
+
 /* Create initial domain 0. */
 /* The vGIC for DOM0 is exactly emulating the hardware GIC */
 config.gic_version = XEN_DOMCTL_CONFIG_GIC_NATIVE;
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig b/xen/arch/arm/tee/Kconfig
new file mode 100644
index 000..e69de29
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile b/xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile
new file mode 100644
index 000..c54d479
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/tee/Makefile
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+obj-y += tee.o
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..7f7a846
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+/*
+ * xen/arch/arm/tee/tee.c
+ *
+ * Generic part of TEE