[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <03008e2f-5a2f-78af-528a-3b31b1013aad@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 02:19:00 -0400
From: Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Cc: Mayuresh Chitale <mchitale@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
jens.wiklander@...aro.org, patches@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tee: ACPI support for optee driver
On 09/22/2017 05:37 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 03:45:28PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> On 2017/9/21 15:12, Mayuresh Chitale wrote:
>>> This patch modifies the optee driver to add support for parsing
>>> the conduit method from an ACPI node.
>>
>> Sorry I didn't involve this earlier, but I think this is a wrong
>> approach, in ACPI 5.1+ spec, there is a bit in FADT table which
>> indicates PSCI using SMC or HVC, please see ACPI 6.2 [1],
>> Table 5-37 Fixed ACPI Description Table ARM Boot Architecture Flags.
>>
>> Can we just use that to get the conduit method for optee driver too?
>>
>> [1]: http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACPI_6_2.pdf
>
> It is just not a matter of conduit method but also to define how OPTEE
> should be detected. It is up to Linaro (who owns OP-TEE) to put forward
> a binding at ACPI (ARM) spec level.
>
> We do not define ACPI bindings on a kernel mailing list.
>
> NAK on this patch.
Is this actively being tracked by Linaro? If not, can Applied folks ping
me off-list and I will proxy your request into Linaro.
Jon.
--
Computer Architect | Sent from my Fedora powered laptop
Powered by blists - more mailing lists