On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 04:59:42PM +0800, Neal Liu wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 09:09 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 03:19:03PM +0800, Neal Liu wrote: > > > On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 17:34 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > > > > This kind of thing is something that ARM have seems to shy away from > > > > doing - it's a point I brought up many years ago when the whole > > > > trustzone thing first appeared with its SMC call. Those around the > > > > conference table were not interested - ARM seemed to prefer every > > > > vendor to do off and do their own thing with the SMC interface. > > > > > > Does that mean it make sense to model a sec-rng driver, and get each > > > vendor's SMC function id by DT node? > > > > _If_ vendors have already gone off and decided to use different SMC > > function IDs for this, while keeping the rest of the SMC interface > > the same, then the choice has already been made. > > > > I know on 32-bit that some of the secure world implementations can't > > be changed; they're burnt into the ROM. I believe on 64-bit that isn't > > the case, which makes it easier to standardise. > > > > Do you have visibility of how this SMC is implemented in the secure > > side? Is it in ATF, and is it done as a vendor hack or is there an > > element of generic implementation to it? Has it been submitted > > upstream to the main ATF repository? > > > > Take MediaTek as an example, some SoCs are implemented in ATF, some of > them are implemented in TEE. We have no plan to make generic > implementation in "secure world". I think you have your answer right there - by _not_ making the API generic and giving no motivation to use it, different vendors are going to do different things (maybe even with a different API as well) so there's no point the kernel driver pretending to be a generic driver. If the driver isn't going to be generic, I see little point in the SMC function number being in DT. I think that as a _whole_ is a big mistake - there should be a generic kernel driver for this, and there should be a standardised interface to it through firmware. So, I would encourage you to try to get it accepted one way or another amongst vendors as a standardised interface. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC for 0.8m (est. 1762m) line in suburbia: sync at 13.1Mbps down 424kbps up
