[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191218005316.GG35479@atomide.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 16:53:16 -0800
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: "Andrew F. Davis" <afd@...com>
Cc: linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: OMAP2+: Introduce check for OP-TEE in
omap_secure_init()
* Andrew F. Davis <afd@...com> [191217 23:48]:
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-secure.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-secure.c
> @@ -20,6 +21,18 @@
>
> static phys_addr_t omap_secure_memblock_base;
>
> +bool optee_available;
The above can be static bool optee_available?
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-secure.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-secure.h
> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@
> #ifndef OMAP_ARCH_OMAP_SECURE_H
> #define OMAP_ARCH_OMAP_SECURE_H
>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +
> /* Monitor error code */
> #define API_HAL_RET_VALUE_NS2S_CONVERSION_ERROR 0xFFFFFFFE
> #define API_HAL_RET_VALUE_SERVICE_UNKNWON 0xFFFFFFFF
> @@ -72,6 +74,7 @@ extern u32 rx51_secure_dispatcher(u32 idx, u32 process, u32 flag, u32 nargs,
> extern u32 rx51_secure_update_aux_cr(u32 set_bits, u32 clear_bits);
> extern u32 rx51_secure_rng_call(u32 ptr, u32 count, u32 flag);
>
> +extern bool optee_available;
> void omap_secure_init(void);
And then this change should not be needed, right?
Otherwise series looks OK to me, thanks for updating it.
Regards,
Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists