From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759399Ab3KMR6G (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:58:06 -0500 Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com ([209.85.216.172]:48460 "EHLO mail-qc0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756293Ab3KMR55 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:57:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [2620:0:1000:1b02:6e3b:e5ff:fe16:f1aa] In-Reply-To: <5282E068.1070608@nvidia.com> References: <1383819106-1400-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <52828EF5.6090909@wwwdotorg.org> <5282E068.1070608@nvidia.com> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 09:57:57 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/7] ARM: support for Trusted Foundations secure monitor From: Olof Johansson To: Alex Courbot Cc: Stephen Warren , Russell King , Tomasz Figa , Dave Martin , Arnd Bergmann , Kevin Hilman , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Alex Courbot wrote: > On 11/13/2013 05:38 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Stephen Warren >> wrote: >>> >>> On 11/07/2013 03:11 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: >>>> >>>> Just a set of small fixes to address the concerns expressed on v9 with >>>> the >>>> non-prefixed version DT properties. I hope there won't be a need for an >>>> eleventh (!) version. :P >>> >>> >>> BTW, this version looks fine to me. On IRC, Olof said it looked OK to >>> him. I'm just waiting to hear back from Olof/Russell whether I should >>> merge this through the Tegra tree, or whether the first 1-3 patches >>> should go through Russell's tree. >> >> >> I pinged Russell, and he brought up the fact that there were earlier >> requests to move it to drivers/firmware. It would make sense to try to >> get that done before merging, especially if you anticipate someone >> using TF on 64-bit platforms. > > > IIRC when we discussed this point your last comment was as follows: Touche. :) Thanks for the reminder. > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: >> I think we can probably merge this under arch/arm now, and when we >> figure out what needs to be common with ARM64 we can move it out to a >> good location. It might be that mostly just a header file with ABI >> conventions needs to be shared, not actual implementation, for >> example. > > So I thought we agreed on that. If in the end we prefer to move the ARM > firmware interface into drivers/firmware, I'm fine with that too (Tomasz > also confirmed he would be ok with it) but I wonder if that would not be > somehow premature. > > Another worry of mine is that this might delay this patchset some more. > Support for TF is one of the last remaining step towards making NVIDIA > branded Tegra retail devices (SHIELD and TegraNote at the moment) run > upstream directly. I missed 3.13, I'd like to make sure I won't miss 3.14. > Would it be acceptable if we move the ARM firmware interface to a common > place after this patchset is merged? Well, as I already said I'm ok with things going into arch/arm to start with, as long as Russell is. Once we see 64-bit needs for the same we'll move it out -- it's not like it's a whole lot of code to start with. But Russell has veto on the topic. :-) Russell still has his pull requests outstanding so I'm not sure where things are at, but I don't think this will miss 3.14 at this rate. -Olof