linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: arm,scmi: add smc/hvc transports

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200207105649.GC36345@bogus>
Date:   Fri, 7 Feb 2020 10:56:49 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     peng.fan@....com, mark.rutland@....com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, linux-imx@....com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, andre.przywara@....com,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: arm,scmi: add smc/hvc transports

On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 02:59:47PM -0700, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:01:25PM +0800, peng.fan@....com wrote:
> > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> >
> > SCMI could use SMC/HVC as tranports, so add into devicetree
> > binding doc.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt | 4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> > index f493d69e6194..03cff8b55a93 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> > @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ Required properties:
> >
> >  The scmi node with the following properties shall be under the /firmware/ node.
> >
> > -- compatible : shall be "arm,scmi"
> > +- compatible : shall be "arm,scmi" or "arm,scmi-smc"
> >  - mboxes: List of phandle and mailbox channel specifiers. It should contain
> >  	  exactly one or two mailboxes, one for transmitting messages("tx")
> >  	  and another optional for receiving the notifications("rx") if
> > @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ The scmi node with the following properties shall be under the /firmware/ node.
> >  	  protocol identifier for a given sub-node.
> >  - #size-cells : should be '0' as 'reg' property doesn't have any size
> >  	  associated with it.
> > +- arm,smc-id : SMC id required when using smc transports
> > +- arm,hvc-id : HVC id required when using hvc transports
>
> Don't the SMC ids get standardized?
>

Unfortunately no. Please don't ask me why ;) as there's no technical reason
to not standardize it. I pushed hard for it, but for this particular case the
SMC/HVC transport is considered to be outside the SCMI protocol standards as
it's transport related.

I completely agree it is total non-sense. I will try to convince them showing
this discussion as reference but can't guarantee anything.

--
Regards,
Sudeep