On 2021-06-09 12:23:23, Jens Wiklander wrote:
Uses the new simplified tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf() function instead of the old deprecated tee_shm_alloc() function which required specific TEE_SHM-flags.
Signed-off-by: Jens Wiklander jens.wiklander@linaro.org
Since this series is essentially a rewrite of the shm allocation logic, it is worth pointing out that the rewrite still uses contiguous allocations (from alloc_pages()). The tee_bnxt_fw driver is performing an order-10 allocation which is the max, by default. I've only tested tee_bnxt_fw when it was built-in to the kernel and tee_bnxt_fw_probe() was called early in boot but I suspect that it might not succeed when built as a module and loaded later after memory is segmented. I think this driver would benefit from being able to request a non-contiguous allocation.
Is this rewrite a good time to offer drivers a way to perform a non-contiguous allocation?
Tyler
drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c index ed10da5313e8..56d00ddd4357 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c @@ -212,10 +212,9 @@ static int tee_bnxt_fw_probe(struct device *dev) pvt_data.dev = dev;
- fw_shm_pool = tee_shm_alloc(pvt_data.ctx, MAX_SHM_MEM_SZ,
TEE_SHM_MAPPED | TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF);
- fw_shm_pool = tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf(pvt_data.ctx, MAX_SHM_MEM_SZ); if (IS_ERR(fw_shm_pool)) {
dev_err(pvt_data.dev, "tee_shm_alloc failed\n");
dev_err(pvt_data.dev, "tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf failed\n");-- 2.31.1