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: <CAFEAcA9sdrykbVLntW35fo0MgV2VNXnLUFa4AM=Aw34bOBprYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 17:04:33 +0100
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@...aro.org>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, andre.przywara@....com, 
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Sascha Bischoff <sascha.bischoff@....com>, 
	Timothy Hayes <timothy.hayes@....com>, "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, 
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, suzuki.poulose@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/26] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: Add Arm GICv5

On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 at 16:53, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org> wrote:
> Specifically, for IRS/ITS frames then - what the current schema does is
> correct, namely, it does _not_ spell out whether the IRS/ITS config
> frame is NS/S/Realm/Root interrupt domain, that's information that the
> client implicitly assumes.
>
> Are we OK with this approach ? This would leave open the possibility
> of having a DT per security-state.
>
> If in the DT schema I define eg reg -> "IRS NS config frame" by
> construction the binding can't be used for anything else.
>
> Please let me know if we are in agreement on this matter.

This would break the QEMU virt board -> EL3 guest firmware ->
EL1 Linux flow. We need a binding which lets us optionally
specify "oh by the way here is where the other non-NS frames are".
I don't have a strong view on the specific syntax.

-- PMM

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ