linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 0/2] firmware: arm_scmi: add smc/hvc transports support

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: <20200330140544.GA22712@bogus>
Date:   Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:05:54 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Cc:     "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "viresh.kumar@...aro.org" <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 0/2] firmware: arm_scmi: add smc/hvc transports support

On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 04:32:53PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 08:27:47AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > Hi Sudeep,
> >
> > > Subject: [PATCH V5 0/2] firmware: arm_scmi: add smc/hvc transports support
> >
> > Are you fine with this patchset? Or You expect multi channel support?
> >
> 
> I applied these patches[1]. I also looked at multi channel support and
> I think it should be simple. I have made changes and will post soon.
> I would like you to review and if possible test. I don't want to break
> the existing single channel, so please do test in your setup for single
> channel itself.
> 

This caused build break when !CONFIG_HAVE_ARM_SMCCC, I have added the
below fixup. Posting the same for sake of tracking.

Regards,
Sudeep

--
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
index 6b1b0d6c6d0e..11b238f81923 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
 obj-y	= scmi-bus.o scmi-driver.o scmi-protocols.o scmi-transport.o
 scmi-bus-y = bus.o
 scmi-driver-y = driver.o
-scmi-transport-y = mailbox.o shmem.o smc.o
+scmi-transport-y = shmem.o
+scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_MAILBOX) += mailbox.o
+scmi-transport-$(CONFIG_HAVE_ARM_SMCCC) += smc.o
 scmi-protocols-y = base.o clock.o perf.o power.o reset.o sensors.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_POWER_DOMAIN) += scmi_pm_domain.o
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
index 94fc2b2df940..34bfadca14cc 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
@@ -210,7 +210,9 @@ struct scmi_desc {
 };

 extern const struct scmi_desc scmi_mailbox_desc;
+#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
 extern const struct scmi_desc scmi_smc_desc;
+#endif

 void scmi_rx_callback(struct scmi_chan_info *cinfo, u32 msg_hdr);
 void scmi_free_channel(struct scmi_chan_info *cinfo, struct idr *idr, int id);
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
index e76a3fab1074..6ef61e52eef7 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
@@ -827,7 +827,9 @@ ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(versions);
 /* Each compatible listed below must have descriptor associated with it */
 static const struct of_device_id scmi_of_match[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "arm,scmi", .data = &scmi_mailbox_desc },
+#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
 	{ .compatible = "arm,scmi-smc", .data = &scmi_smc_desc},
+#endif
 	{ /* Sentinel */ },
 };