[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<DM6PR04MB65755A95AA492565F7576D10FC362@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 08:07:49 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Jens Wiklander
<jens.wiklander@...aro.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org" <op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org>, Shyam
Saini <shyamsaini@...ux.microsoft.com>, Jerome Forissier
<jerome.forissier@...aro.org>, Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>, Ilias
Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, Bart Van Assche
<bvanassche@....org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Ard Biesheuvel
<ardb@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 1/3] rpmb: add Replay Protected Memory Block (RPMB)
subsystem
> > +struct rpmb_frame {
> > + u8 stuff[196];
> > + u8 key_mac[32];
> > + u8 data[256];
> > + u8 nonce[16];
> > + __be32 write_counter;
> > + __be16 addr;
> > + __be16 block_count;
> > + __be16 result;
> > + __be16 req_resp;
> > +} __packed;
>
> I haven't looked at the NVME or the UFS spec in detail. Although, I assume the
> above frame makes sense for those types of interfaces/protocols too?
The rpmb implementation in ufs, has drifted apart from eMMC. E.g. in UFS4.0:
- the frame is different - see struct ufs_arpmb_meta in include/uapi/scsi/scsi_bsg_ufs.h,
- Additional extended header was added,
- the frame size is no longer 512Bytes (256Bytes meta info + 256Bytes data) but 4k,
- there are 9 rpmb operations instead of 7,
- The atomicity requirement of the command sequence was waved,
And probably more differences that I forgot.
This is why it is better to designated this as an eMMC-only implementation?
Thanks,
Avri
Powered by blists - more mailing lists