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().
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
