Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] tee: add OP-TEE driver

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: "Javier González" <javier@javigon.com>,
	"Valentin Manea" <valentin.manea@huawei.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, emmanuel.michel@st.com,
	"Herbert Xu" <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	jean-michel.delorme@st.com, tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	"Jens Wiklander" <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] tee: add OP-TEE driver
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 21:47:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7401865.1Pb83TJP0q@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3960750D-EAE4-4FA0-9E15-89F9CE39257E@javigon.com>

On Sunday 19 April 2015 13:17:20 Javier González wrote:
> 
> Only providing user space support would defeat one of the main purposes
> of the driver. We could better organize the patches and divide them into user
> space support and in-kernel support if that is what you mean. In the end
> the interfaces are orthogonal, even though the functionality should be very
> similar.

Splitting up the patches to separate the user interface from the in-kernel
interface is certainly a good idea, but aside from that, I also agree with
Greg on this point: if you want to establish an in-kernel interface, don't
add any dead code at the beginning, but add it together with the users
of that interface.

	Arnd