Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: define proper status for caam jr

Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: define proper status for caam jr
From: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2022 12:47:53 +0100
Cc: ZHIZHIKIN Andrey <andrey.zhizhikin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, peng.fan@xxxxxxx, ping.bai@xxxxxxx, alice.guo@xxxxxxx, agx@xxxxxxxxxxx, krzk@xxxxxxxxxx, leonard.crestez@xxxxxxx, festevam@xxxxxxxxx, marex@xxxxxxx, herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, horia.geanta@xxxxxxx, daniel.baluta@xxxxxxx, frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-imx@xxxxxxx, devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hongxing.zhu@xxxxxxx, s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx, robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx, thunder.leizhen@xxxxxxxxxx, martink@xxxxxxxxx, aford173@xxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shengjiu.wang@xxxxxxx, qiangqing.zhang@xxxxxxx, op-tee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, l.stach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, jun.li@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <30312d09effae6b78309723a7261f85915b8d5b8.camel@pengutronix.de>
User-agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.12

Hi Rouven,

Am 2022-01-07 10:46, schrieb Rouven Czerwinski:

.. since AFAIK i.MX8M* can not be run without TF-A.


Are you sure? There probably aren't any boards out there
without TF-A, but why shouldn't it work without it?

-michael

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: define proper status for caam jr
  - From: Lucas Stach

References:
- [PATCH v3 0/2] CAAM Driver: re-factor and set proper JR status
  - From: Andrey Zhizhikin
- [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: define proper status for caam jr
  - From: Andrey Zhizhikin
- Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: define proper status for caam jr
  - From: Rouven Czerwinski
- RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: define proper status for caam jr
  - From: ZHIZHIKIN Andrey
- Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: define proper status for caam jr
  - From: Rouven Czerwinski