On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 06:19:00PM -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 1 Jun 2022, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 11:23:50AM +0000, Oleksii Moisieiev wrote: > > > Introduce device-perms property which is intended to set the device > > > permissions for the System Management interfaces. > > > An example of this interface is SCMI (System Control and Management > > > Interface) which controls clocks/power-domains/resets etc from the > > > Firmware. This property sets the device_id to set the device permissions > > > for the Fimware using BASE_SET_DEVICE_PERMISSIONS message (see 4.2.2.10 of [0]). > > > > Is that an exhaustive list of controls? Seems like there would be a > > GET_DEVICE_PERMISSIONS. > > > > > Device permissions management described in DEN 0056, Section 4.2.2.10 [0]. > > > Given parameter should set the device_id, needed to set device > > > permissions in the Firmware. > > > This property is used by trusted Agent to set permissions for the devices, > > > passed-through to the non-trusted Agents. Trusted Agent will use device-perms to > > > set the Device permissions for the Firmware (See Section 4.2.2.10 [0] > > > for details). > > > Agents concept is described in Section 4.2.1 [0]. > > > > As I said on the call discussing this, this looks very similar to other > > proposals wanting to control or check permissions on devices handled by > > some provider. While the consumer of the binding is different in various > > proposals, that doesn't really matter from a DT perspective. DT is just > > describing some type of connection between nodes. So I'm looking for > > collaboration here with folks that have made prior proposals. To put it > > another way, for a new common binding like this, I want to see more than > > one user. > > Do you have a pointer to another similar proposal or the name of someone > that might be interested and might be having a second use-case for this? ST folks who were on the call... IIRC from earlier SystemDT calls, that Xilinx had a similar need? Here's the various proposals I found: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20200701132523.32533-1-benjamin.gaignard@xxxxxx/ https://lore.kernel.org/all/20190318100605.29120-1-benjamin.gaignard@xxxxxx/ https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180227140926.22996-1-benjamin.gaignard@xxxxxx/ The h/w in question is the ETZPC or TZPC. I would guess the SCMI interface was designed with this h/w in mind. Rob