From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg Kroah-Hartman) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 20:49:03 +0200 Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/2] tee: add OP-TEE driver In-Reply-To: References: <1429257057-7935-1-git-send-email-jens.wiklander@linaro.org> <1429257057-7935-3-git-send-email-jens.wiklander@linaro.org> <20150418085747.GC29858@kroah.com> Message-ID: <20150418184903.GB30508@kroah.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 11:36:53AM +0200, Javier Gonz?lez wrote: > Hi, A: No. Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top > We have discussed and implemented an in-kernel interface for the driver. > However, we need to agree on that interface with the kernel submodules that > can be interested in using it (e.g., IMA, keyring). We though it was easier > to have a framework in place before taking this space. This makes sense > since a TEE driver will be, as for today, mostly used by user space. > applications. No, please provide a "real" solution, just providing a framework that no one uses means that I get to delete it from the kernel tree the next release, and I doubt you want that :) Please do all of the work here, as odds are, what you need in the end will be different from what you have proposed here. thanks, greg k-h