From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6444F3D891F; Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:31:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784881876; cv=none; b=GuSYhYJBlA4un+68PYHl0a+fSsXLicwzy4B98saq/EyoZDHTeQq+HCkBN7yXW/tBqqYP6a4qi4PxXb/flh/Adiv/bbhnrBj0rV8BCEtEWB0uAawTFd2s+0p/yI44kL4Ok2I7VjF5tKsxPNxHwo8GpPy0lCVfM5Hhrhy3Zz/OD8k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784881876; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LjFM22oQWzNpmMFrqJ7UnSnXNWzItsmieqqNmlfthJc=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=bg7DvG3cUDGbEeTKkwPohroJb0sOjOymT0oGWfnF/pyXtDj1ylnSMb72uJWHobFmEQA+UIsmxAMQ42Xdl+KZC+XWsuKeSbmpo6VEvZ4cXIbNI1+pqBQripHk6v0txTeJakLzUTgGlqCTdSY5d02i2lI9t1chGbWEPMTHsySTZ8g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=dQlal/UM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="dQlal/UM" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C0A9B1F000E9; Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:31:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1784881871; bh=FuroT+H2TyPsv5C1b+SGgyJsdHvwa0lZx5NuZTvgHFc=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=dQlal/UMThYe8TzWGZaoFUS4wOCbpQaqkOpN9cmm0VbrRivplnrtYoACOqUHrAHaR xGsEL/QMvCnDYPCN183Qh46G5UlY6L48zsb1hsR3jW1wTCnSMdEuYxy0WBgrIARyb8 6JgBgcdr3K2d0wUJO8EmdwfHasZ6ph1YUYgerq32TlKRSKLvMVPWvsB0/gwP72reYQ MbF7mGJZ3TDi/4Rx6Jt9FjpyZ6VPfQMlNdYpt8Sh6U4CBjoSWvU9vsU0FlH41NIzE2 BoFbJfkutb5tjfa54O5pQJEMyDUu72xSdsMCa0+4doS16GV/GauY/GdPUWqglT2Y+7 RgPOMRco4f8tw== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v30 6/7] arm64: dts: imx8ulp: add secure enclave node Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: pankaj.gupta@oss.nxp.com Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, Frank.Li@kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, robh@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260724-imx-se-if-v30-6-ce8ba256692c@nxp.com> References: <20260724-imx-se-if-v30-0-ce8ba256692c@nxp.com> <20260724-imx-se-if-v30-6-ce8ba256692c@nxp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:31:10 +0000 Message-Id: <20260724083110.C0A9B1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: imx@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [High] Missing 'memory-region' DT property causes EdgeLock Enclave driver= probe failure -- --- Patch [6]: [PATCH v30 6/7] arm64: dts: imx8ulp: add secure enclave node= --- commit dd89141b9b11f1e2b0130369e668c9487347c666 Author: Pankaj Gupta arm64: dts: imx8ulp: add secure enclave node This commit adds support for the NXP secure enclave called EdgeLock Enclave firmware for imx8ulp-evk. It adds the sram0 label and a new secure-enclave device tree node. > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8ulp.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot= /dts/freescale/imx8ulp.dtsi > index c6d1bb9edf388..182f1444b6434 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8ulp.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8ulp.dtsi [ ... ] > @@ -185,6 +185,13 @@ scmi_sensor: protocol@15 { > #thermal-sensor-cells =3D <1>; > }; > }; > + > + hsm0: secure-enclave { > + compatible =3D "fsl,imx8ulp-se-ele-hsm"; > + mbox-names =3D "tx", "rx"; > + mboxes =3D <&s4muap 0 0>, <&s4muap 1 0>; > + sram =3D <&sram0>; > + }; [Severity: High] Will this node cause the EdgeLock Enclave driver probe to fail? Looking at se_if_probe() in drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.c, the driver requ= ires reserved memory initialization when reserved_dma_ranges is set (which is tr= ue for the fsl,imx8ulp-se-ele-hsm compatibility string): drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.c:se_if_probe() { ... if (if_node->reserved_dma_ranges) { ret =3D of_reserved_mem_device_init(dev); if (ret) return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to init reserved memory region."); } ... } Since the memory-region property is missing from this new device tree node, of_reserved_mem_device_init() will return an error, causing the probe to unconditionally abort. Should a memory-region property be included here to prevent the probe failure? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260724-imx-se-if-= v30-0-ce8ba256692c@nxp.com?part=3D6