* Andrew F. Davis <afd@xxxxxx> [191216 20:57]: > Looks like the TI quirk idea is not moving forward, even the QCOM quirk > looks like it may get kicked out. arm_smccc_smc() will remain only for > SMCCC compliant calls, but it looks like a generic arm_smc() wouldn't be > too opposed upstream. Yes so it seems. > Either way this patch would still be valid as when OP-TEE is present > then arm_smccc_smc() will be the right call to make, how we handle the > legacy calls can be sorted out later if a generic SMC call is implemented. Please see my comment regarding this patch earlier in this thread pasted below for convenience: * Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> [191119 16:22]: > In any case, you should do the necessary checks for HAVE_ARM_SMCCC > only once during init. I'm not sure how much checking for > "/firmware/optee" helps here, sounds like we have a broken system > if the firmware is not there while the arm_smccc_smc() should > still work just fine :) So only check once during init. And during init, you should probably also check that arm_smccc_smc() actually infd optee if "/firmware/optee" is set, and only then set set the right function pointer or some flag. Regards, Tony
