On 7/26/22 16:30, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 12:49:49AM +0200, Maximilian Luz wrote:
Add bindings for the Qualcomm Trusted Execution Environment (TrEE) UEFI
Secure application (uefisecapp) client.
[...]
+examples:
+ - |
+ firmware {
+ scm {
+ compatible = "qcom,scm-sc8180x", "qcom,scm";
+ };
+ tee-uefisecapp {
+ compatible = "qcom,tee-uefisecapp";
+ };
Do you expect some issues using the scm driver APIs without the
any additions in the DT ? I mean can't you auto-discover by using the
APIs. I haven't looked at the driver or any other patches in the series,
but I would like to know if we can avoid adding any new bindings if it
can be discovered via those SCM driver APIs.
Not at scale, at least as far as I can tell.
Part of the setup-process of this driver is to query an "application ID"
from a unique string identifying the application (in this case
"qcom.tz.uefisecapp"). If that call fails, we know the app is not there.
But: If we'd want to support more than just "uefisecapp" we'd have to
query each app in some predefined list. As far as I can tell, there's no
method to enumerate all present/loaded ones. The Windows driver seems to
use a hard-coded list of apps that are present on some specific SoC.
It might be possible that there exists such a method, but if it does, the
Windows driver doesn't seem to use it and I don't know about it.
Also, there would need to be at least some type of compatible to
indicate the presence of that TrEE / Secure Application interface used by
uefisecapp. Unless you want to send some potentially unsupported SCM
commands on every platform with qcom,scm and see what comes back.
So ultimately I think it's better to add a DT entry for it. That also
(hopefully) ensures that someone tested and (at least in some way)
validated this. Again, It's a reverse engineered driver.
Regards,
Max
