From: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org>
To: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>
Cc: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
Steev Klimaszewski <steev@kali.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] firmware: Add support for Qualcomm UEFI Secure Application
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2022 12:56:58 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <db00f6a9-263d-9c47-486e-7080ffc5b3c9@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f42539d0-c2a3-a2b2-c35b-b7a5904b376f@gmail.com>
Hi Maximilian,
On 02/08/22 18:52, Maximilian Luz wrote:
>
>
> On 8/2/22 13:51, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>> Hi Maximilian,
>>
>> On 23/07/2022 23:49, Maximilian Luz wrote:
>>> On modern Qualcomm platforms, access to EFI variables is restricted to
>>> the secure world / TrustZone, i.e. the Trusted Execution Environment
>>> (TrEE or TEE) as Qualcomm seems to call it. To access EFI variables, we
>>> therefore need to talk to the UEFI Secure Application (uefisecapp),
>>> residing in the TrEE.
>>>
>>> This series adds support for accessing EFI variables on those
>>> platforms.
>>>
>>> To do this, we first need to add some SCM call functions used to manage
>>> and talk to Secure Applications. A very small subset of this interface
>>> is added in the second patch (whereas the first one exports the
>>> required
>>> functions for that). Interface specifications are extracted from [1].
>>> While this does not (yet) support re-entrant SCM calls (including
>>> callbacks and listeners), this is enough to talk to the aforementioned
>>> uefisecapp on a couple of platforms (I've tested this on a Surface
>>> Pro X
>>> and heard reports from Lenovo Flex 5G, Lenovo Thinkpad x13s, and Lenovo
>>> Yoga C630 devices).
>>>
>>> The third patch adds a client driver for uefisecapp, installing the
>>> respective efivar operations. The application interface has been
>>> reverse
>>> engineered from the Windows QcTrEE8180.sys driver.
>>>
>>> Apart from uefisecapp, there are more Secure Applications running that
>>> we might want to support in the future. For example, on the Surface Pro
>>> X (sc8180x-based), the TPM is also managed via one.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure whether this should go to drivers/firmware or to
>>> drivers/soc/qcom. I've put this into firmware as all of this is
>>> essentially an interface to the secure firmware running in the
>>> TrustZone
>>> (and SCM stuff is handled here already), but please let me know if I
>>> should move this.
>>
>> From what I see so far is that this is adapted from downstream
>> qseecom driver, this approach could work for a limited usecases but
>> not scalable, as we cannot add drivers for each Qualcomm specific TA
>> in kernel.
>> This has to be handled in much generic way using Linux TEE framework,
>> and let the userspace side deal with TA specific bits.
>
> I generally agree with the sentiment, however UEFI variables should
> IMHO be
> handled by the kernel. Moving handling of those to userspace breaks
> things like
> EFI-based pstore and efivarfs. The latter will in turn break some
> user-space
> tools (most notably efibootmgr used by e.g. GRUB and I think fwupdmgr
> which
> needs to set some capsule variables). Ideally, we would find a way to
> not break
> these, i.e. have them work out-of-the-box.
>
> A similar argumentation might apply to the TPM app.
See below, there is already an existing TPM app driver [2] in kernel
although the app is based on OP-TEE.
>
>> AFAIU, Qualcomm is moving away from qseecom interface to new
>> smc-invoke interface, most of Qualcomm SoCs starting from SDM660
>> already have support to this.
>>
>> This interface provides a better abstracted IPC mechanism to talk to
>> TA. Most of these TA specific interfaces are packed in closed
>> userspace source.
>> Having said that QTEE smcinvoke driver can be modeled as a proper TEE
>> driver with Userspace driving the TA specific bits using existing tee
>> uapis.
>> This also brings in other features like loading, Listeners aka
>> callbacks, secure memory allocations..etc.
>>
>> In the past, I have tried to do a prototype of this smcinvoke driver
>> as a proper tee driver, incase you are interested patches are at
>> https://git.linaro.org/landing-teams/working/qualcomm/kernel.git/log/?h=tracking-qcomlt-qcomtee
>> Plan is to discuss with Qualcomm and send it for upstream review.
>
> Thanks for this information! So as far as I understand it, this is
> currently an
> interface to user-space only, i.e. does not allow in-kernel drivers
> for apps?
The Linux TEE framework already provides an in-kernel interface to TEE
as well via TEE bus [1]. There are already multiple kernel drivers [2]
[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] using it. So an EFI driver can be an addition to that.
Now coming on to TEE implementations, the drivers I mentioned are based
on OP-TEE where devices are queried/enumerated during OP-TEE probe here
[8]. So in similar manner QTEE smcinvoke driver should be able to
register devices on the TEE bus.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/staging/tee.rst#n56
[2] drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ftpm_tee.c
[3] drivers/char/hw_random/optee-rng.c
[4] drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/optee.c
[5] security/keys/trusted-keys/trusted_tee.c
[6] drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c
[7] drivers/rtc/rtc-optee.c
[8] drivers/tee/optee/device.c
-Sumit
PS. TBH, I haven't looked into detail workings for the QTEE smcinvoke
driver.
> It would be great if this could then be extended to handle (the bare
> minimum
> of) in-kernel drivers (i.e. only things that the kernel itself needs,
> like EFI
> variables). Alternatively, I'm happy to hear suggestions on how we not
> break
> the aforementioned things while moving handling off to userspace.
>
>> I think its worth exploring if uefisecapp can talk smcinvoke.
>> I can ping Qualcomm engineers to see if that is doable.
>
> I think that would be great! Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Max
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-02 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-23 22:49 [PATCH 0/4] firmware: Add support for Qualcomm UEFI Secure Application Maximilian Luz
2022-07-23 22:49 ` [PATCH 1/4] firmware: qcom_scm: Export SCM call functions Maximilian Luz
2022-07-23 22:49 ` [PATCH 2/4] firmware: Add support for Qualcomm Trusted Execution Environment SCM calls Maximilian Luz
2022-07-23 22:49 ` [PATCH 3/4] firmware: Add support for Qualcomm UEFI Secure Application Maximilian Luz
2023-01-17 8:24 ` Johan Hovold
2023-01-17 8:42 ` Maximilian Luz
2023-01-18 20:45 ` Maximilian Luz
2023-01-19 16:47 ` Johan Hovold
2023-01-19 17:19 ` Maximilian Luz
2023-01-17 11:05 ` Johan Hovold
2023-01-17 12:07 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-23 22:49 ` [PATCH 4/4] dt-bindings: firmware: Add Qualcomm UEFI Secure Application client Maximilian Luz
2022-07-25 1:06 ` Rob Herring
2022-07-26 10:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-07-26 11:15 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-26 13:25 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-07-26 15:00 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-27 11:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-07-27 13:00 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 7:48 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-07-28 10:25 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 10:38 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-07-28 10:49 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-26 14:30 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-26 15:15 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-26 15:41 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-26 17:01 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-27 11:38 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-07-27 13:03 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-27 13:24 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-27 14:49 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 6:03 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2022-07-28 10:48 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 11:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-28 12:13 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 12:24 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2022-07-28 15:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-07-28 15:16 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2022-07-28 16:16 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-28 16:24 ` Konrad Dybcio
2022-07-28 12:35 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2022-07-28 12:49 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 16:56 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2022-07-28 17:27 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-29 8:52 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-29 15:11 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-31 9:54 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2022-07-31 22:48 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 8:23 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-28 10:05 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 11:21 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-28 11:45 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-28 13:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-28 14:09 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-07-25 19:27 ` [PATCH 0/4] firmware: Add support for Qualcomm UEFI Secure Application Rob Herring
2022-07-25 20:16 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-08-02 11:51 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2022-08-02 13:22 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-08-02 14:02 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-08-02 19:11 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-09-02 7:26 ` Sumit Garg [this message]
2022-09-02 13:18 ` Maximilian Luz
2022-09-05 6:50 ` Sumit Garg
2022-11-23 11:22 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2022-11-23 12:05 ` Maximilian Luz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=db00f6a9-263d-9c47-486e-7080ffc5b3c9@linaro.org \
--to=sumit.garg@linaro.org \
--cc=agross@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@somainline.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luzmaximilian@gmail.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=shawn.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org \
--cc=steev@kali.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).