linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: rmtfs: Document qcom,assign-to-nav

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: <e79ae240-95ce-1629-70f3-378d98f38841@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 14 Dec 2022 09:11:46 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, andersson@...nel.org,
        agross@...nel.org
Cc:     marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: rmtfs: Document
 qcom,assign-to-nav

On 13/12/2022 18:03, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> Some SoCs mandate that the RMTFS is also assigned to the NAV VM, while
> others really don't want that. Since it has to be conditional, add a
> bool property to toggle this behavior.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml  | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> index 2998f1c8f0db..1d8c4621178a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> @@ -31,6 +31,11 @@ properties:
>      description: >
>        vmid of the remote processor, to set up memory protection
>  
> +  qcom,assign-to-nav:
> +    type: boolean
> +    description: >

No need for '>'

> +      whether to also assign the region to the NAV VM

Here and in property name you express desired Linux driver action, but
it is better to express the property of the hardware. What is
different/special in these SoCs or their configuration that additional
assignment is needed?


Best regards,
Krzysztof