From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81B9FCD4F5B for ; Tue, 19 May 2026 09:46:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=QyxSie6iGAWz0pB/vmjQiqcUpqr3MLIifYDTqIoI7Q4=; b=BIC/jq6Az5wD+HsfS7hRpGLBxA DHlw135hS5FGttVuum6y+9N/+Qltw4Ke6sNdWmoNkxAJKIpV4pqOxvb2VK1mUbhyW0x9lN2pqci8L fLvmFmx4qux8viSn2yUvIPfX+ed10ckgttiZOj/CTHkd9t4S63iOEiYHMh1IsywmIJOIxXW7d27uH YV+IrfeXGCwMcxI5/OLVvZ61BO5KkPSviV1m3GwPHoZoSj5OqZ6Tg7IwqZV7lEneHxrgskaHKMPOr b6skO0B0Z/nu4reITBhhXfHxFZ994dQCRibUlSCuSwHaZjfUuvIeOnV4iDqsaRQbBIXmYjcoP4OL1 cLgtqXpQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPH1f-00000000z59-3Euu; Tue, 19 May 2026 09:46:11 +0000 Received: from sea.source.kernel.org ([172.234.252.31]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPH1d-00000000z4U-3Dlz for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 19 May 2026 09:46:10 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sea.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE19644131; Tue, 19 May 2026 09:46:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B5585C2BCB3; Tue, 19 May 2026 09:46:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1779183968; bh=1q56YkIpKB4JqZI01BH4FGFKZ+NyxhaqIasZhEiOaEI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=i+k1LzZVosvKUbvNbN5b7ee5QQzUzDzCg7R0bOFvcIBc9zv8fxG1IKt8wpE3vxcK7 0Svy7Bv0lPxEA8cGkTJvQPRQX7RHXpAd97lsRPuUc6JCAKiapNDITY1TloGy+RyO8N 0fqGHQG9m00DmltF7HavJO7VF5V7knoRs2fXXvGR2vv3Fp7wiSm/2VGQavt95f++Ja VM0ySeFlulqA0TqL18E2k6uQ1IFtr52gBJbxxzYTuc8w6aDxYHL2RLz4w7xsnRTH/s GtE5V8nYWAApzu3U+W2jfOB98Dbn2lxziJKb1HkgsKedebfpcoVlDKuCXLmm2gQnll ofmfQgOwiNHMQ== Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 10:46:02 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Suzuki K Poulose Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)" , linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Kardashevskiy , Catalin Marinas , Dan Williams , Jason Gunthorpe , Jonathan Cameron , Marc Zyngier , Samuel Ortiz , Steven Price , Xu Yilun Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/14] coco/TSM: Host-side Arm CCA IDE setup via connect/disconnect callbacks Message-ID: References: <20260427065121.916615-1-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260519_024609_825636_3BF43881 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.95 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 09:24:07AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > On 18/05/2026 13:59, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 12:21:07PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) wrote: > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h | 85 +++ > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_smc.h | 168 +++++ > > > > Curious, but why does this stuff have to live in the arch code? Wouldn't > > it be better off somewhere like drivers/firmware/ or > > include/linux/arm-rmi.h? > > Good point. RMI interface is only available for arm64 (not in Arm32). That > said, it is indeed a firmware ! ;-) interface. The APIs are closely > integrated with the KVM Realm management. If the general consensus is > to move them under drivers/firmware (like PSCI), we could take that > approach. I'd certainly prefer that as it means it's co-located with other firmware interface code and also means that the arch maintainers don't need to worry about changes to driver code :p Will