linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Allow parameter in smc/hvc calls

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]

Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2023 07:54:45 -0700
From:   Nikunj Kela <quic_nkela@...cinc.com>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
CC:     <cristian.marussi@....com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Allow parameter in smc/hvc calls


On 4/12/2023 1:37 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 07:42:50AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>
>> that's a good suggestion. Any solution you propose shouldn't just limit to
>> only one parameter. IMO, there should be some way to pass all 6 parameters
>> since we do have a use case of at least two parameters.
> Please elaborate on your use-case.
Based on your comments below, we will change our hypervisor to make use 
of shmem.
>
>> The shmem proposal is fine however please also incorporate passing of other
>> parameters.
> You are missing the point here. SMC/HVC is just a doorbell and the main point
> I made earlier is that there is no need for vendors to try colourful things
> here if it is not necessary. So no, I don't want any extra bindings or more
> than one param is that is not needed. I will wait for the reason as requested
> above.
ok, understood. In that case, we will change our hypervisor to use shmem 
address as instance identifier. Please add support for one param, thanks!