[U-Boot] [PATCH] optee: support rockchip optee binary release

[Heiko Stübner]

Hi Kever,

Am Freitag, 29. März 2019, 13:16:26 CET schrieb Kever Yang:
> On 03/29/2019 07:25 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote:
> >> On 29.03.2019, at 12:21, Kever Yang <kever.yang at rock-chips.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Rockchip provide tee binary release in 'rkbin' repository:
> >> https://github.com/rockchip-linux/rkbin
> >> For some historical reason, rockchip optee binary is using
> >> 'r1' instead of 'lr' as U-Boot entry.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kever Yang <kever.yang at rock-chips.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> common/spl/spl_optee.S | 3 +++
> >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/common/spl/spl_optee.S b/common/spl/spl_optee.S
> >> index 8bd1949ddf..092307b3cc 100644
> >> --- a/common/spl/spl_optee.S
> >> +++ b/common/spl/spl_optee.S
> >> @@ -8,5 +8,8 @@
> >>
> >> ENTRY(spl_optee_entry)
> >> 	ldr lr, =CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP
> > Can we make this selectable based on a dedicated config-option?  We provide our
> > own OPTEE port for some of our modules and I would like to have this as an opt-in
> > or opt-out option in Kconfig.
> 
> I think you are using OPTEE for RK3368/RK3399, right? Then the use case
> is different, you are using OPTEE as bl32 for armv8, and this spl_optee is
> for armv7 only.
> I'm OK to add a Kconfig option if you really have different usage,
> and I think this patch does not break things because the no one use 'r1'
> now.

rk3229 has support in upstream op-tee, so possibly the calling convention
is different with that? And of course there may come a time when people
may want to use upstream-op-tee instead of a binary-blob.

Heiko