Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mailbox: arm,mhu: Make secure interrupt optional

[Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>]

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 05:17:26PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 5:10 AM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:

[...]

> >
> > No this doesn't work IMO. Yes standalone everything looks fine, but you can
> > insert a module requesting this channel and bring down the system. So I am
> > not for this change.
>
> Not having the interrupt listed in DT doesn't prevent that. Is this
> security by obscurity?
>

I agree, as I mentioned in the other thread, if we had a way to mark that
channel as used elsewhere or disabled or unavailable, it would have been
great.

> I don't really care which way this is fixed though.

Understood.

> I just want the warning gone. We've all got better things to worry about.

Agreed.

> The DT not having the interrupt has been that way for years (presumably)
> and the kernel never needs the interrupt, so the schema should reflect
> reality.

I prefer this approach.

> On the flip side, considering it *can* be present already, there's not
> really much argument for not having it.
>

Can't disagree/argue that 😄.

--
Regards,
Sudeep