linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: dts: qcom: monaco: add QCrypto node

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aUu5C+evZ/ECJbGQ@hu-arakshit-hyd.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2025 15:27:31 +0530
From: Abhinaba Rakshit <abhinaba.rakshit@....qualcomm.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: dts: qcom: monaco: add QCrypto node

On Wed, Dec 24, 2025 at 09:42:03AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/12/2025 09:33, Abhinaba Rakshit wrote:
> > Add Qualcomm Crypto Engine device node for Monaco platform.
> > 
> > QCE and Crypto DMA nodes patch was applied as part of
> > commit a86d84409947 ("arm64: dts: qcom: qcs8300: add QCrypto nodes"),
> > however was partially reverted by commit cdc117c40537 ("arm64: dts: qcom:
> > qcs8300: Partially revert "arm64: dts: qcom: qcs8300: add QCrypto nodes"")
> > due to compatible string being mismatched against schema.
> 
> ...due to Qualcomm engineer not ever bothering to build test the code.
> 
> Was it build tested now? Typically this is implied by trusting people,
> but not here. Trust is lost.
> 

Yes, the updated patch has now been build‑tested (including DT schema checks).
The previous issue happened due to an oversight on our end, and I agree that it should not have slipped through.
I’ll ensure future submissions are properly tested before sending them upstream.