On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 02:43:18AM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
+
> +description: |
> + The Inside Secure SafeXcel EIP-93 is a cryptographic engine IP block
> + integrated in varios devices with very different and generic name from
> + PKTE to simply vendor+EIP93. The real IP under the hood is actually
> + developed by Inside Secure and given to license to vendors.
> +
> + The IP block is sold with different model based on what feature are
> + needed and are identified with the final letter. Each letter correspond
> + to a specific set of feature and multiple letter reflect the sum of the
> + feature set.
You write it is licensed to vendors, so are you sure these could be
used alone, without vendor customizations/hookups etc? I think you
should have a dedicated, SoC-specific compatible in the front. I am not
sure if this was discussed already, though.
> +
> + EIP-93 models:
> + - EIP-93i: (basic) DES/Triple DES, AES, PRNG, IPsec ESP, SRTP, SHA1
> + - EIP-93ie: i + SHA224/256, AES-192/256
> + - EIP-93is: i + SSL/DTLS/DTLS, MD5, ARC4
> + - EIP-93ies: i + e + s
> + - EIP-93iw: i + AES-XCB-MAC, AES-CCM
> +
> +properties:
> + compatible:
> + enum:
> + - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93i
> + - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93ie
> + - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93is
> + - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93ies
> + - inside-secure,safexcel-eip93iw
> +
> + reg:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> + interrupts:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> +required:
> + - compatible
> + - reg
> + - interrupts
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> + - |
> + #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> +
> + crypto@1e004000 {
> + compatible = "inside-secure,safexcel-eip93ies";
> + reg = <0x1fb70000 0x1000>;
Looks like not matching unit address.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
