On Tue, 2022-04-05 at 16:43 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: > > Bean Huo <huobean@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Hi Alex, > > > > Thanks for this unified RPMB interface, I wanted to verify this on > > our > > UFS, it seems you didn't add the UFS access interface in this > > version > > from your userspace tools, right? > > No I didn't but it should be easy enough to add some function pointer > redirection everywhere one of the op_* functions calls a vrpmb_* > function. Do you already have a UFS RPMB device driver? > Hi Alex, Thanks for your feedback. We now access UFS RPMB through the RPMB LUN BSG device, RPMB is a well- known LU and we have a userspace tool to access it. I see that if we're going to use your interface, "static struct rpmb_ops" should be registered from a lower-level driver, for example in a UFS driver, yes there should be no problem with this registration, but I don't know with the current way Compared, what are the advantages to add a driver. maybe the main advantage is that we will have an unified user space tool for RPMB. right? Kind regards, Bean
