linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Sat, 7 Jan 2023 11:42:47 +0100
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, agross@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org, 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 v2 1/2] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: rmtfs: Document
 qcom,assign-to-nav



On 6.01.2023 18:55, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 02, 2023 at 05:50:33PM +0100, 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>
>> ---
>> v1 -> v2:
>> - Rewrite the newly added description
>>
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml | 6 ++++++
>>  1 file changed, 6 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..4026788a4e40 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
>> @@ -31,6 +31,12 @@ properties:
>>      description: >
>>        vmid of the remote processor, to set up memory protection
>>  
>> +  qcom,assign-to-nav:
>> +    type: boolean
>> +    description:
>> +      Whether to also assign the region to a third (NAV) VM, as opposed to
>> +      the usual 2.
> 
> For better or worse, the binding currently takes the vmid of the first
> instance in qcom,vmid. Would it not be cleaner to turn qcom,vmid into an
> array and pass the nav vmid as a second element in that array?
I suppose I could do that..

Konrad
> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> 
>> +
>>  required:
>>    - qcom,client-id
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.39.0
>>