From: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/4] firmware: smccc: arm-cca-guest: Bind the TSM provider to an SMCCC device
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 18:56:28 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq5ase72qvwb.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260603-determined-bumblebee-of-promise-e633d6@sudeepholla>
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> writes:
...
> +static const struct smccc_device_info smccc_devices[] __initconst = {
> + {
> + .func_id = ARM_SMCCC_TRNG_VERSION,
> + .requires_smc = false,
> + .min_return = ARM_SMCCC_TRNG_MIN_VERSION,
> + .device_name = "arm-smccc-trng",
> + },
> +};
> +
> +static bool __init
> +smccc_probe_smccc_device(const struct smccc_device_info *smccc_dev)
> +{
> + struct arm_smccc_res res;
> + unsigned long ret;
> +
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64))
> + return false;
> +
> + if (smccc_conduit == SMCCC_CONDUIT_NONE)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (smccc_dev->requires_smc && smccc_conduit != SMCCC_CONDUIT_SMC)
> + return false;
> +
> + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(smccc_dev->func_id, &res);
> + ret = res.a0;
> +
> + if ((s32)ret < 0)
> + return false;
> +
> + return ret >= smccc_dev->min_return;
> +}
> +
>
I am not sure we want the check to be as simple as ret < 0. Some
function IDs may return input errors based on the supplied arguments
(for example, RMI_ERROR_INPUT). In those cases, we would likely want
this to be handled via a callback.
We also want to use conditional compilation for some function IDs.
Given the callback approach and the #ifdefs, I wonder whether what we
currently have is actually simpler and more flexible.”
> void __init arm_smccc_version_init(u32 version, enum arm_smccc_conduit conduit)
> {
> struct arm_smccc_res res;
> @@ -31,7 +68,7 @@ void __init arm_smccc_version_init(u32 version, enum arm_smccc_conduit conduit)
> smccc_version = version;
> smccc_conduit = conduit;
>
> - smccc_trng_available = smccc_probe_trng();
> + smccc_trng_available = smccc_probe_smccc_device(&smccc_devices[0]);
>
> if ((smccc_version >= ARM_SMCCC_VERSION_1_2) &&
> (smccc_conduit != SMCCC_CONDUIT_NONE)) {
> @@ -241,14 +278,20 @@ subsys_initcall(arm_smccc_bus_init);
>
> static int __init smccc_devices_init(void)
> {
> - struct platform_device *pdev;
> -
> - if (smccc_trng_available) {
> - pdev = platform_device_register_simple("smccc_trng", -1,
> - NULL, 0);
> - if (IS_ERR(pdev))
> - pr_err("smccc_trng: could not register device: %ld\n",
> - PTR_ERR(pdev));
> + const struct smccc_device_info *smccc_dev;
> + struct arm_smccc_device *sdev;
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(smccc_devices); i++) {
> + smccc_dev = &smccc_devices[i];
> +
> + if (!smccc_probe_smccc_device(smccc_dev))
> + continue;
> +
> + sdev = arm_smccc_device_register(smccc_dev->device_name);
> + if (IS_ERR(sdev))
> + pr_err("%s: could not register device: %ld\n",
> + smccc_dev->device_name, PTR_ERR(sdev));
> }
>
> return 0;
>
-aneesh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-04 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-27 10:02 [PATCH v6 0/4] Switch Arm SMCCC firmware services to an SMCCC bus Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-05-27 10:02 ` [PATCH v6 1/4] firmware: smccc: Add an Arm " Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-06-03 18:52 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-05-27 10:02 ` [PATCH v6 2/4] firmware: hwrng: arm_smccc_trng: Register as an SMCCC device Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-05-27 10:02 ` [PATCH v6 3/4] firmware: smccc: arm-cca-guest: Bind the TSM provider to " Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-06-04 9:18 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-06-04 9:21 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-06-04 10:24 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-06-04 10:55 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-06-04 13:26 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2026-06-04 13:45 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-05-27 10:02 ` [PATCH v6 4/4] coco: guest: arm64: Replace dummy CCA device with sysfs ABI Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-06-04 12:58 ` [PATCH v6 0/4] Switch Arm SMCCC firmware services to an SMCCC bus Aneesh Kumar K.V
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=yq5ase72qvwb.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--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