Hi,
On 30/09/2024 12:47, Andrei Cherechesu (OSS) wrote:
From: Andrei Cherechesu <[email protected]>
Change the handling of SiP SMC calls to be more generic,
instead of directly relying on the `platform_smc()` callback
implementation.
Try to handle the SiP SMC first through the `platform_smc()`
callback (if implemented). If not handled, check if the
SCMI layer is available and that the SMC is a valid SCMI
message. Handle it then within the SCMI layer which forwards
it to EL3 FW, only if the SMC comes from Dom0.
NIT: I would remove the last sentence as this is implementation details.
But if you want to keep it, then s/Dom0/Hardware domain/
Signed-off-by: Andrei Cherechesu <[email protected]>
---
xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c b/xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c
index 7f2f5eb9ce..0de194a132 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/vsmc.c
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include <asm/cpufeature.h>
#include <asm/monitor.h>
#include <asm/regs.h>
+#include <asm/scmi-smc.h>
#include <asm/smccc.h>
#include <asm/tee/ffa.h>
#include <asm/tee/tee.h>
@@ -224,6 +225,22 @@ static bool handle_sssc(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
}
}
+/* Secure Calls defined by the Silicon Provider (SiP) */
+static bool handle_sip(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
+{
+ uint32_t fid = (uint32_t)get_user_reg(regs, 0);
+
+ /* Firstly, let each platform define custom handling for these SMCs */
+ if ( platform_smc(regs) )
+ return true;
+
+ /* Otherwise, if valid SCMI SMC, forward the call to EL3 */
This comment is likely going to stale. This is up to smci_handle_smc()
to decide what to do. So I would remove this comment.
With that:
Acked-by: Julien Grall <[email protected]>
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
