________________________________ From: Jerome Forissier jerome.forissier@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 12:45 AM To: machiry aravind Cc: Jens Wiklander; tee-dev@lists.linaro.org; Eric Gustafson Subject: Re: [Tee-dev] OP-TEE OS: Param Mapping in TA
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:34 AM, machiry aravind <machiry_msidc@hotmail.commailto:machiry_msidc@hotmail.com> wrote:
________________________________ From: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.orgmailto:jerome.forissier@linaro.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 12:30 AM To: machiry aravind Cc: Jens Wiklander; tee-dev@lists.linaro.orgmailto:tee-dev@lists.linaro.org; Eric Gustafson Subject: Re: [Tee-dev] OP-TEE OS: Param Mapping in TA
Hi guys,
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:10 AM, machiry aravind <machiry_msidc@hotmail.commailto:machiry_msidc@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks a lot Jens.
I just want to make sure that, there was nothing fundamental problem for this.
My idea is to change op-tee kernel driver to pin the corresponding user-pages (i.e memref.buffer) which ensures that these will not be unmapped, before making smc and unpinning them on return.
Would that be triggered by TEEC_RegisterSharedMemory() in libteec?
[Aravind] Nope, The plan is to be transparent. non-secure user space can pass any user-space pointer as buffer argument. op-tee kernel driver verifies the address, pins corresponding pages.
While it sounds quite convenient, I'm afraid it can encourage the development of non-GP-compliant applications.
[Aravind] I agree. But, IMHO, GP is way too-restrictive. I do not know if it is possible to submit a RFC.
-- Jerome