linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] firmware: Add support for Qualcomm UEFI Secure Application

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <33348300-b3a7-af67-5729-8d0471aff2dc@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Nov 2022 13:05:02 +0100
From:   Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>
To:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Steev Klimaszewski <steev@...i.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] firmware: Add support for Qualcomm UEFI Secure
 Application

Hi,

On 11/23/22 12:22, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> Hi Max,
> 
> On 02/08/2022 14:22, Maximilian Luz wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/2/22 13:51, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:

[...]

>>> I think its worth exploring if uefisecapp can talk smcinvoke.
>>> I can ping Qualcomm engineers to see if that is doable.
>>
>> I think that would be great! Thanks!
> Sorry for such a long delay to reply to this,
> 
> here is what I have.
> 
> Access to TA using SCM calls remain valid and it will continue to work till SM8550 and probably after that if the TA is *NOT* loaded using smcinvoke for some reasons.
> 
> But overall by default on all new SoCs after sm8550 all the access to TA is only done via smcinvoke, and the underlying scm call that are used in this patchset will not be supported anymore.
> 
>  From SM8550, we will need to move this driver to a proper TEE client kernel driver.
> 
> So, with that in mind, I would suggest that we carefully name the compatibles based on SoC rather than generic ones.

Thanks! That makes sense.

Regards,
Max