From: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.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>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] firmware: arm_rmm: Move RSI support out of arch/arm64
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2026 18:35:42 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq5atsp83eft.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <anMcw5lTFN7OYreL@arm.com>
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 12:02:51PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) wrote:
>> The RSI SMCCC function IDs describe a firmware ABI and are not arm64
>> architecture specific definitions. Follow-up changes need to use them from
>> non-arch code, including drivers/firmware/smccc and the Arm CCA guest
>> driver.
>>
>> Move the complete Realm Service Interface (RSI) implementation from
>> arch/arm64 to drivers/firmware/arm_rmm. The RSI SMCCC definitions and
>> command helpers are also moved to include/linux so they can be shared by
>> architecture code and firmware or driver code. This also keeps the
>> firmware interface outside architecture code, as requested [1].
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/agsNO9cc7H-b0H8L@willie-the-truck
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
>
> I haven't checked but Sashiko has some points that it may break the
> build on other architectures with COMPILE_TEST.
>
> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260805063255.1638614-1-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org
>
> (for some reason I get error 502 above; hopefully it's temporary)
>
Below is the sashiko output
>> -#endif /* __ASM_RSI_CMDS_H */
>> +#endif /* __LINUX_ARM_RSI_CMDS_H_ */
> Now that this header is moved to include/linux/ to be shared by cross
> architecture code, will it break non-ARM64 builds?
> Looking at rsi_attestation_token_init() further up in this file:
> struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs regs;
> ...
> arm_smccc_1_2_smc(&args.regs, &args.regs);
>
> Both struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs and arm_smccc_1_2_smc() are guarded by
> CONFIG_ARM64 in include/linux/arm-smccc.h. If a generic firmware driver
> using COMPILE_TEST includes this header on a different architecture, it
> seems compilation will fail.
Only arm64 code is including that header for now.
arch/arm64/mm/init.c:37:#include <linux/arm-rsi-cmds.h>
arch/arm64/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h:5:#include <linux/arm-rsi-cmds.h>
arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-prot.h:69:#include <linux/arm-rsi-cmds.h>
arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h:11:#include <linux/arm-rsi-cmds.h>
arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c:10:#include <linux/arm-rsi-cmds.h>
drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-guest/arm-cca.c:6:#include <linux/arm-rsi-cmds.h>
drivers/firmware/arm_rmm/rsi.c:11:#include <linux/arm-rsi-cmds.h>
-aneesh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-05 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-05 6:32 [PATCH v9 0/7] Switch Arm SMCCC firmware services to an SMCCC bus Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 6:32 ` [PATCH v9 1/7] firmware: smccc: Add an Arm " Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 6:32 ` [PATCH v9 2/7] firmware: hwrng: arm_smccc_trng: Register as an SMCCC device Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 11:08 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-08-05 6:32 ` [PATCH v9 3/7] firmware: arm_rmm: Move RSI support out of arch/arm64 Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 11:21 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-08-05 13:05 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2026-08-05 6:32 ` [PATCH v9 4/7] arm64: realm: Move Realm memory encryption ops to RSI code Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 6:32 ` [PATCH v9 5/7] virt: coco: arm-cca-guest: Rename TSM report source file Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 6:32 ` [PATCH v9 6/7] firmware: smccc: arm-cca-guest: Bind the TSM provider to an SMCCC device Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 6:32 ` [PATCH v9 7/7] coco: guest: arm64: Replace dummy CCA device with sysfs ABI Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2026-08-05 9:51 ` [PATCH v9 0/7] Switch Arm SMCCC firmware services to an SMCCC bus Catalin Marinas
2026-08-05 12:22 ` 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=yq5atsp83eft.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com \
--cc=andre.przywara@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@arm.com \
--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