From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Neeraj Soni <neeraj.soni@oss.qualcomm.com>,
andersson@kernel.org, konradybcio@kernel.org
Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] soc: qcom: ice: Add HWKM v1 support for wrapped keys
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 11:21:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <75fd82c8-3e19-467f-bb8a-eed197b63068@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251028175623.1054084-1-neeraj.soni@oss.qualcomm.com>
On 10/28/25 6:56 PM, Neeraj Soni wrote:
> HWKM v1 and v2 differ slightly in wrapped key size and the bit fields for
> certain status registers and operating mode (legacy or standard).
>
> Add support to select HWKM version based on the major and minor revisions.
> Use this HWKM version to select wrapped key size and to configure the bit
> fields in registers for operating modes and hardware status.
>
> Support for SCM calls for wrapped keys is being added in the TrustZone for
> few SoCs with HWKM v1. Existing check of qcom_scm_has_wrapped_key_support()
> API ensures that HWKM is used only if these SCM calls are supported in
> TrustZone for that SoC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neeraj Soni <neeraj.soni@oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
[...]
> + /* HWKM version v2 is present from ICE 3.2.1 onwards while version v1
> + * is present only in ICE 3.2.0. Earlier ICE version don't have HWKM.
> + */
> + if (major > 3 ||
> + (major == 3 && (minor >= 3 || (minor == 2 && step >= 1))))
> + ice->hwkm_version = QCOM_ICE_HWKM_V2;
> + else if ((major == 3) && (minor == 2))
> + ice->hwkm_version = QCOM_ICE_HWKM_V1;
> + else
> + ice->hwkm_version = 0;
> +
> dev_info(dev, "Found QC Inline Crypto Engine (ICE) v%d.%d.%d\n",
> major, minor, step);
>
> + if (!ice->hwkm_version)
> + dev_info(dev, "QC Hardware Key Manager (HWKM) not supported\n");
This isn't an error condition (ICE vers 3.0.0..<3.2.0 simply don't have it),
so I think it's fair not to print this possibly somewhat concerning message
[...]
> static unsigned int translate_hwkm_slot(struct qcom_ice *ice, unsigned int slot)
> {
> - return slot * 2;
> + /* The slot offset depends upon HWKM version */
This comment doesn't provide any additional context (e.g. what is the
underlying reason for V2 requiring a wider stride) - please provide
some or remove it, as otherwise it reiterates the single LoC below
Looks good otherwise
Konrad
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-30 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-28 17:56 [PATCH v2] soc: qcom: ice: Add HWKM v1 support for wrapped keys Neeraj Soni
2025-10-30 10:21 ` Konrad Dybcio [this message]
2025-10-30 15:40 ` Neeraj Soni
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=75fd82c8-3e19-467f-bb8a-eed197b63068@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=konradybcio@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraj.soni@oss.qualcomm.com \
/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