> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pankaj Gupta
> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 6:06 PM
> To: Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley
> <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sascha Hauer
> <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pengutronix Kernel Team
> <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>; Rob
> Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add imx-se-fw
> binding doc
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2024 8:09 PM
> > To: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley
> > <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sascha Hauer
> > <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pengutronix Kernel Team
> > <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>; Rob
> > Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add
> > imx-se-fw binding doc
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 07:06:30AM +0000, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 9:00 PM
> > > > To: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Rob Herring
> > > > <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor
> > > > Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> > > > Sascha
> > Hauer
> > > > <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pengutronix Kernel Team
> > > > <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>; Rob
> > > > Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> > > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add
> > > > imx-se-fw binding doc
> >
> > For the third time, please fix your mail client so it stops inserting this garbage.
> >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 11:02:21AM +0000, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 7:38 PM
> > > > > > To: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Rob Herring
> > > > > > <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> > > > > > Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Shawn Guo
> > > > > > <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sascha
> > > > Hauer
> > > > > > <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pengutronix Kernel Team
> > > > > > <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>;
> > Rob
> > > > > > Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > > linux- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > > imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: fsl:
> > > > > > add imx-se-fw binding doc
> > > >
> > > > Please fix this ^
> > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 09:28:31AM +0000, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 10:20 PM
> > > > > > > > To: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Rob Herring
> > > > > > > > <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > > > > > > > <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> > > > > > > > Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sascha
> > > > > > Hauer
> > > > > > > > <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pengutronix Kernel Team
> > > > > > > > <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam
> > > > > > > > <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> > > > > > > > linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > > > > linux- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > > > > imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: fsl:
> > > > > > > > add imx-se-fw binding doc
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please fix this ^
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 10:21:37AM +0530, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> > > > > In case of imx8ulp, there is a single node.
> > > > > Having a same node name for both parent and child, is bit strange.
> > > > > firmware {
> > > > > firmware {
> > > > > };
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > Request you to allow to re-evaluate this point.
> > > >
> > > > I dunno, it's all firmware so I don't really get why it is so strange!
> > > > Can you remind me again why it is inside a parent node to begin with?
> > >
> > > Three type of security firmware(s): HSM, V2X-SHE, V2X-HSM, are
> > > running at
> > the cores dedicated to the each different secure-enclave hardware IP(s).
> > > Each firmware receives the message to act and response back with the
> > completed act.
> > > This message exchanges happens through the Message-Unit hardware
> > interface.
> > > There could be multiple MU for multiple security firmware, that
> > > would be
> > used for respective message exchanges.
> > >
> > > This node defines the details of each such MU interface.
> > >
> > > Reason to put under firmware:
> > > Since this node specifies interface details between kernel and
> > firmware, it was put under parent "firmware {".
> > > I am not sure if this reason is correct enough to begin with.
> > >
> > > Thanks for allowing to revisit.
> > >
> > > I will make the change to whatever you finalize now. Thanks.
> >
> > I'm sorry, I still don't understand why you have the parent node. It
> > seems pointless to me, and this new node could be added at the top level.
> Lately, I got this feedback in NXP internal as well.
>
> Accepted. Will add it at the top level.
> Thanks.
>
> Help with the suggestion for the node name:
> 1. enclave-interface
> For multiple nodes, it will be:
> enclave-interface-0
> enclave-interface-1
> enclave-interface-2
> 2. secure-enclave
> For multiple nodes, it will be:
> secure-enclave-0
> secure-enclave-1
> secure-enclave-3
>
> Or share any other suggested word(s).
> Thanks.
Will use "secure-enclave" as the node name, in the v7 patch.
Will post the V7 patch-set, by end of the next week.
Please reply if anyone think otherwise.
Thanks.
