From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] soc: qcom: Remote FS memory driver Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 03:00:58 -0700 Message-ID: <20170811100058.GA7064@infradead.org> References: <20170803025754.19101-1-bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> <20170803025754.19101-5-bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> <20170805095804.GA14401@infradead.org> <20170807162327.GH29306@minitux> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170807162327.GH29306@minitux> Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Rob Herring , Frank Rowand , Andy Gross , David Brown , Mark Rutland , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-soc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:23:27AM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > Up until this patch the user space tool that implements the message > handler just mapped the reserved memory region though /dev/mem, but this > requires /dev/mem access and for the later platforms we need to make a > call into TrustZone to provide the remote permission to access this > memory region. So we need some code in the kernel to represent this. > > > Else: NAK as the scheme looks completely brain dead and bonkers. > > I can rework the commit message in an attempt to better explain the > setup and hope you/people find it slightly less bonkers. > > Does this sound reasonable? Please rework the commit message. And it should probably grow a saner module name, too.