linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: defconfig: Enable QCOMTEE on Qualcomm SM8650+

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]

Message-ID: <948b35bc-8479-4d94-a5f7-e8893de8fbf1@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 12:45:58 +0530
From: Harshal Dev <harshal.dev@....qualcomm.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@....qualcomm.com>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...nel.org>,
        Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>
Cc: Amirreza Zarrabi <amirreza.zarrabi@....qualcomm.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: defconfig: Enable QCOMTEE on Qualcomm SM8650+

Hi Krzysztof,

On 12/9/2025 11:28 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 08/12/2025 13:18, Harshal Dev wrote:
>> Enable QCOMTEE driver on Qualcomm SM8650+ SoCs to facilitate communication
>> with the Qualcomm Trusted Execution Environment (QTEE).
>> (No enablement required in DTS files since QCOMTEE device is dynamically
>> registered by the QCOM_SCM firmware driver)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Harshal Dev <harshal.dev@....qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v3:
>> - Updated the commit message to reflect the supported Qualcomm platforms.
>> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251205-qcom_qcomtee_defconfig-v2-1-c92560b0346e@qti.qualcomm.com
>>
> 
> I gave you the exact example to follow. Maybe it is not that important
> for others, so I will not object, but OTOH it is important for me, thus
> I will not give reviewed by. I damn asked VERY CLEARLY:
> 
> "Just mention which UPSTREAM boards (which you called Qualcomm
> platforms) use this driver."
> 

I did highlight my reasons for wondering if a board needs to be mentioned, perhaps I should
take some more time before sending the next patch to ensure we've actually concluded the
discussion on the last one:

"since the driver is related to SoC firmware and
not on the board, I will mention SM8650+ as the supported SoCs since we began enabling
the driver from that chip on-wards. I hope this reasoning is fine."

> Usage of something on SoC is not a proof that it actually is used by
> upstream platforms and we absolutely do not care at all about downstream
> users. I spent way too much time on this and even very specific
> instructions were not working, so I don't know how else I can help.
> 

I understand the frustration. Let's take a breather, I will reflect and take a week off
before I try again or ask someone else to.

Thanks,
Harshal

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof