linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mtd: devices: Qualcomm SCM storage support

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: <87fr7ol0wb.fsf@bootlin.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 19:38:44 +0100
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
Cc: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,  Junhao Xie
 <bigfoot@...xa.com>,  Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,  Richard
 Weinberger <richard@....at>,  Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
  linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,  Xilin Wu <sophon@...xa.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mtd: devices: Qualcomm SCM storage support

Hello Bjorn,

>> If I may, I even skipped the mail entirely because it was not about mtd
>> in the end. There is a single big patch labelled "firmware: qcom:". I
>> believe the series would better be split in smaller chunks. Typically
>> one for the storage support and another one for the firmware part, at
>> least.
>> 
>
> The firmware patch adds wrappers for the secure world interface, which
> without the MTD driver will lack consumers of the API - i.e. I'd prefer
> not to pick that part, or parts thereof, alone.

Yes, I understand.

> So I think it does make sense to introduce the two parts together in one
> series (if you have any requests for splitting the MTD patch up in any
> way I have no objections).
>
> This leaves us with the practical problem of getting it merged, which I
> believe would best be handled by me picking the firmware patch and
> sharing this in an immutable branch with you, once we're happy with the
> set (which won't be for 6.20).

Works for me!

I'll send a minor review with a couple of comments, but we can apply
this close after next -rc1, if you are good with the fw part.

Thanks,
Miquèl