linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] firmware: smccc: LFA: use smcc 1.2

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: <20251219-thundering-striped-nightingale-db4ecf@sudeepholla>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 10:37:48 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Vedashree Vidwans <vvidwans@...dia.com>
Cc: <salman.nabi@....com>, <andre.przywara@....com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
	<mark.rutland@....com>, <ardb@...nel.org>, <chao.gao@...el.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<sdonthineni@...dia.com>, <vsethi@...dia.com>,
	<vwadekar@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] firmware: smccc: LFA: use smcc 1.2

On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 12:47:52AM -0800, Vedashree Vidwans wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/9/25 03:42, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 08, 2025 at 10:13:11PM +0000, Vedashree Vidwans wrote:
> > > Update driver to use SMCCC 1.2+ version as mentioned in the LFA spec.
> > > 
> > 
> > I would prefer if you work with Salman Nabi and get this incorporated
> > in the original patch by providing this as a review feedback.
> > 
> > There is no point in having this independent of the original patch as it
> > is not yet merged.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Regards,
> > Sudeep
> 
> Thank you for the suggestion.
> 
> Hi Salman,
> Could we come up with a strategy to combine the LFA driver patches? I have
> been working on this recently and I would be happy to revise all the patches
> so that we are followiing the specification from the start.
> 
> Please let me know if you think of any other approach.
> 

Ideally, you should comment directly on the original submission, outlining the
specific changes you would like to see - just as you would when reviewing a
patch. This helps document your requests clearly and allows the author to
address them and post a revised version, ensuring that all changes are
properly tracked on the mailing list.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep