On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 03:46:35PM +0000, Achin Gupta wrote: > > On 10 Jun 2020, at 08:43, Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 04:35:51PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 10:45:10AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > >>> Add devicetree bindings for a Arm PSA FF-A compliant non-secure partition > >>> at virtual interface(VMs). > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> .../devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,psa-ffa.txt | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,psa-ffa.txt > >> > >> I'm hoping this goes away if the firmware is discoverable, but if not DT > >> bindings are DT schema now. > > > > We'll need the binding for the kvm host side, because there are plenty > > of partition properties that are not discoverable (e.g. number of vCPUs). > > Just trying to understand the req. a bit better… > > The FF-A driver in the host can use FFA_PARTITION_INFO_GET to determine > the count of partitions and their vCPUs. > > Is this about a guest being able to find out how many vCPUs it has? This is about KVM finding out the information it needs in order to spawn non-secure partitions. I don't see how it can do that with FFA_PARTITION_INFO_GET -- who would respond? But you're right that number of vCPUs was a bad example. We also need information such as the entry point. Will
