(+ Achin)
On 07/03/2019 21:04, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
From: Volodymyr Babchuk <vlad.babc...@gmail.com>
This enumeration controls TEE type for a domain. Currently there is
two possible options: either 'none' or 'native'.
'none' is the default value and it basically disables TEE support at
all.
'native' enables access to a "real" TEE installed on a platform.
I am aware I made that suggestion. But I think the naming is not ideal between
the user and the toolstack. The question is how this is going to fit with the
S-EL2 feature where multiple TEE can run together?
I have CCed Achin to see he has any vision how this could be interfaced.
It is possible to add another types in the future.
Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk <vlad.babc...@gmail.com>
---
All the patches to optee.c should be merged together. They were
split to ease up review. But they depend heavily on each other.
Changes from v3:
- tee_enabled renamed to tee_type. Currently two types are supported
as described in the commit message
- Add LIBXL_HAVE_BUILDINFO_ARCH_ARM_TEE definition
Changes from v2:
- Use arch.tee_enabled instead of separate domctl
---
docs/man/xl.cfg.5.pod.in | 12 ++++++++++++
tools/libxl/libxl.h | 5 +++++
tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c | 13 +++++++++++++
tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl | 6 ++++++
tools/xl/xl_parse.c | 9 +++++++++
5 files changed, 45 insertions(+)
diff --git a/docs/man/xl.cfg.5.pod.in b/docs/man/xl.cfg.5.pod.in
index ad81af1ed8..e15981882b 100644
--- a/docs/man/xl.cfg.5.pod.in
+++ b/docs/man/xl.cfg.5.pod.in
@@ -2702,6 +2702,18 @@ Currently, only the "sbsa_uart" model is supported for
ARM.
=back
+=over 4
+
+=item B<tee=["none", "native"]>
+
+Set TEE type for the guest. Currently only OP-TEE is supported. If
+this option is set to "native", xl will create guest, which can access
+native TEE on your system (just make sure that you are using OP-TEE
+with virtualization support endabled). Also OP-TEE node will be
+emitted into guest's device tree.
+
+=back
+
=head3 x86
=over 4
diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl.h b/tools/libxl/libxl.h
index a38e5cdba2..b24e4141b1 100644
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl.h
+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl.h
@@ -273,6 +273,11 @@
*/
#define LIBXL_HAVE_BUILDINFO_ARM_GIC_VERSION 1
+/*
+ * libxl_domain_build_info has the arch_arm.tee field.
+ */
+#define LIBXL_HAVE_BUILDINFO_ARCH_ARM_TEE 1
+
/*
* LIBXL_HAVE_SOFT_RESET indicates that libxl supports performing
* 'soft reset' for domains and there is 'soft_reset' shutdown reason
diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c
index 141e159043..6930d0ab3b 100644
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c
+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c
@@ -89,6 +89,19 @@ int libxl__arch_domain_prepare_config(libxl__gc *gc,
return ERROR_FAIL;
}
+ switch (d_config->b_info.arch_arm.tee) {
+ case LIBXL_TEE_TYPE_NONE:
+ config->arch.tee_type = XEN_DOMCTL_CONFIG_TEE_NONE;
+ break;
+ case LIBXL_TEE_TYPE_NATIVE:
+ config->arch.tee_type = XEN_DOMCTL_CONFIG_TEE_NATIVE;
+ break;
+ default:
+ LOG(ERROR, "Unknown TEE type %d",
+ d_config->b_info.arch_arm.tee);
+ return ERROR_FAIL;
+ }
+
return 0;
}
diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
index b685ac47ac..4f1eb229b8 100644
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
@@ -457,6 +457,11 @@ libxl_gic_version = Enumeration("gic_version", [
(0x30, "v3")
], init_val = "LIBXL_GIC_VERSION_DEFAULT")
+libxl_tee_type = Enumeration("tee_type", [
+ (0, "none"),
+ (1, "native")
+ ], init_val = "LIBXL_TEE_TYPE_NONE")
+
libxl_rdm_reserve = Struct("rdm_reserve", [
("strategy", libxl_rdm_reserve_strategy),
("policy", libxl_rdm_reserve_policy),
@@ -615,6 +620,7 @@ libxl_domain_build_info = Struct("domain_build_info",[
("arch_arm", Struct(None, [("gic_version", libxl_gic_version),
("vuart", libxl_vuart_type),
+ ("tee", libxl_tee_type),
AFAICT, TEE also exists on other architecture. So I am wondering whether this
field should be moved out of arch_arm?
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
