[PATCH 12/25] OMAP: Add support to allocate the memory for secure RAM

[Santosh]

On Friday 09 September 2011 12:49 AM, Jean Pihet wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Santosh Shilimkar
> <santosh.shilimkar at ti.com>  wrote:
>> 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 possible size is allocated and can cater to OMAP3XXX / OMAP4XXX
>> secure RAM size requirements.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar<santosh.shilimkar at ti.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-omap2/include/mach/omap-secure.h |    4 +++
>>   arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-secure.c              |   29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   arch/arm/plat-omap/common.c                    |    3 ++
>>   3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/include/mach/omap-secure.h b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/include/mach/omap-secure.h
>> index 26e7bcc..e2f95a0 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/include/mach/omap-secure.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/include/mach/omap-secure.h
>> @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@
>>   #define FLAG_FIQ_ENABLE                        0x1
>>   #define NO_FLAG                                0x0
>>
>> +/* Maximum Secure memory storage size */
>> +#define OMAP_SECURE_RAM_STORAGE        (88 * SZ_1K)
> Is this valid for all supported devices? How to differentiate
> variations in the size for new chips variants in the future?
>
You don't have to. ROM code does that job. We should just ensure
that maximum needed memory is made available to secure code.

Regards
Santosh