[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5b4510dc-bc41-4fd4-b06b-75a3f0c25309@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 01:05:52 +0530
From: Kuldeep Singh <quic_kuldsing@...cinc.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio
<konradybcio@...nel.org>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] qcom_tzmem: Enhance Error Handling for shmbridge
On 10/7/2024 7:55 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Oct 2024 at 16:02, Kuldeep Singh <quic_kuldsing@...cinc.com> wrote:
>>
>> This patchset addresses the tzmem driver probe failure caused by
>> incorrect error handling. The qcom_scm_shm_bridge_enable() SCM call
>> captures SCM success/failure in a0 and E_NOT_SUPPORTED in a1.
>>
>> Previously, qcom_scm returned values based solely on a0, without
>> capturing not_supported scenario. This patchset corrects that behavior.
>>
>
> Ah, I guess this may be the reason for the SHM bridge enablement to
> seemingly work on certain platforms and then lead to crashes when we
> actually try to use it?
This patchset corrects the behavior for handling unsupported SHM bridge scenarios.
If the SHM bridge is supported and enabled for a target, any subsequent failures
should be investigated to understand what went wrong.
I am willing to put effort in that case.
--
Regards
Kuldeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists