From: Jamie Nguyen <jamien@nvidia.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>
Cc: Jamie Nguyen <jamien@nvidia.com>, <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Dat Mach <dmach@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ACPI: FFH: Support FF-A direct request 2 calls
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 13:11:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261103211136.4122648-1-jamien@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261103173907.1996118-3-sudeep.holla@kernel.org>
On Tue, Nov 03, 2026 at 05:39:07PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
> + if (!acpi_ffh_ffa_version_negotiated) {
> + args.a0 = FFA_VERSION;
> + args.a1 = FFA_VERSION_1_2;
Same question as on the earlier thread: how does this work if the
transport driver has already negotiated a version?
[...]
> + ret = acpi_ffh_ffa_features(ffh_ctxt, FFA_PARTITION_INFO_GET_REGS);
> + if (ret)
> + goto out;
I think REGS is only needed when X1 is zero, and if I understand
correctly it's optional at the Non-secure physical instance. Would it
make sense to check it in the lookup path instead, so an explicit
receiver ID still works without it?
[...]
> + memcpy(&args.a4, &buf[4], len - 4 * sizeof(u64));
I believe this would trip FORTIFY_SOURCE's field-spanning write check.
So I suggest:
memcpy((void *)&args + offsetof(struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs, a4),
&buf[4], len - 4 * sizeof(u64));
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-03 21:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-03 17:39 [PATCH 0/2] ACPI: Arm FFH: Add support for OpRegion Offset 2 (FF-A DIRECT_REQ2) Sudeep Holla
2026-11-03 17:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] firmware: arm_ffa: Share FF-A register field definitions Sudeep Holla
2026-11-03 17:39 ` [PATCH 2/2] ACPI: FFH: Support FF-A direct request 2 calls Sudeep Holla
2026-11-03 21:11 ` Jamie Nguyen [this message]
2026-11-04 9:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-11-03 22:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-11-04 10:19 ` Sudeep Holla
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261103211136.4122648-1-jamien@nvidia.com \
--to=jamien@nvidia.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dmach@nvidia.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox