lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Apr]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/4] rpmb subsystem, uapi and virtio-rpmb driver
From
On 4/6/22 10:19, Bean Huo wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 12:22 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>
>> Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2022-04-05 at 16:43 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Alex,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for this unified RPMB interface, I wanted to verify this
>>>>> on
>>>>> our
>>>>> UFS, it seems you didn't add the UFS access interface in this
>>>>> version
>>>>> from your userspace tools, right?
>>>>
>>>> No I didn't but it should be easy enough to add some function
>>>> pointer
>>>> redirection everywhere one of the op_* functions calls a vrpmb_*
>>>> function. Do you already have a UFS RPMB device driver?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Alex,
>>> Thanks for your feedback.
>>>
>>> We now access UFS RPMB through the RPMB LUN BSG device, RPMB is a
>>> well-
>>> known LU and we have a userspace tool to access it.
>>>
>>> I see that if we're going to use your interface, "static struct
>>> rpmb_ops" should be registered from a lower-level driver, for
>>> example
>>> in a UFS driver, yes there should be no problem with this
>>> registration,
>>> but I don't know with the current way Compared, what are the
>>> advantages
>>> to add a driver. maybe the main advantage is that we will have an
>>> unified user space tool for RPMB. right?
>>
>> Pretty much. The main issue for virtio-rpmb is it doesn't really fit
>> neatly into the block stack because all it does is the RPMB part so a
>> non-block orientate API makes sense.
>>
>> Can you point be to where the UFS driver does it's current RPMB
>> stuff?
>>
>
> It's the SCSI BSG driver, in fact, we don't have a dedicated UFS RPMB
> driver in the kernel. RPMB is a well known LU, we are using userspace
> tools to issue SCSI commands directly to the UFS RPMB LU via ioctl()
> from the BSG device node in the /dev/sg/ folder.
>
> Here is the BSG part of the code in the userspace tools:
>
> io_hdr_v4.guard = 'Q';
> io_hdr_v4.protocol = BSG_PROTOCOL_SCSI;
> io_hdr_v4.subprotocol = BSG_SUB_PROTOCOL_SCSI_CMD;
> io_hdr_v4.response = (__u64)sense_buffer;
> io_hdr_v4.max_response_len = SENSE_BUFF_LEN;
> io_hdr_v4.request_len = cmd_len;
> io_hdr_v4.request = (__u64)cdb;
>
>
> ioctl(fd, SG_IO, &io_hdr_v4))

Hi Bean,

I'm not sure where the above comes from? The Android RPMB client uses
slightly different code. Additionally, the retry loop around the
submission of SG/IO commands is very important. See also the
check_sg_io_hdr() call in send_ufs_rpmb_req(). See also
https://cs.android.com/android/platform/superproject/+/master:system/core/trusty/storage/proxy/rpmb.c

Thanks,

Bart.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-04-07 17:28    [W:0.100 / U:1.716 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site