> -----Original Message----- > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2024 6:54 PM > To: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley > <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Pengutronix > Kernel Team <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam > <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] firmware: imx: add driver for NXP EdgeLock > Enclave > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or > opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report > this email' button > > > On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 04:19:35PM +0530, Pankaj Gupta wrote: > > NXP hardware IP(s) for secure-enclaves like Edgelock Enclave(ELE), are > > embedded in the SoC to support the features like HSM, SHE & V2X, using > > message based communication interface. > > > > The secure enclave FW communicates on a dedicated messaging unit(MU) > > based interface(s) with application core, where kernel is running. > > It exists on specific i.MX processors. e.g. i.MX8ULP, i.MX93. > > > > This patch adds the driver for communication interface to > > secure-enclave, for exchanging messages with NXP secure enclave HW > > IP(s) like EdgeLock Enclave (ELE) from Kernel-space, used by kernel > > management layers like > > - DM-Crypt. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/firmware/imx/Kconfig | 12 + > > drivers/firmware/imx/Makefile | 2 + > > drivers/firmware/imx/ele_base_msg.c | 286 +++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/firmware/imx/ele_base_msg.h | 92 +++++++ > > drivers/firmware/imx/ele_common.c | 239 ++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/firmware/imx/ele_common.h | 43 +++ > > drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.c | 531 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.h | 99 +++++++ > > include/linux/firmware/imx/se_api.h | 14 + > > 9 files changed, 1318 insertions(+) > > [...] > > > > > +int imx_ele_msg_send(struct se_if_priv *priv, void *tx_msg) { > > + struct se_msg_hdr *header; > > + int err; > > + > > + header = (struct se_msg_hdr *) tx_msg; > > + > > + if (header->tag == priv->cmd_tag) > > + lockdep_assert_held(&priv->se_if_cmd_lock); > > + > > + scoped_guard(mutex, &priv->se_if_lock); > > scoped_guard() with an empty block doesn't make much sense. Either use > scope_guard() { /* do something locked */ }; or guard(). > Need to allow send more than one message at a time. Hence, done it after taking the lock. Once message sent, scope of lock is over. Thus, scope of the lock se_if_lock, to execute the function "mbox_send_message()", keeping the "se_if_lock" locked. > Sascha > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Steuerwalder Str. 21 | > http://www.pe/ > ngutronix.de%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cpankaj.gupta%40nxp.com%7Cbf79ff917 > 442406e454308dc7b2b8ef2%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0 > %7C0%7C638520674210595147%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM > C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7 > C%7C%7C&sdata=UUYK6KTYzgxY5kO4McFy0%2FGrXxTrf2MG5g4cvJ6E4Qk% > 3D&reserved=0 | > 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |