From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16E7722DA17; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 07:24:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749021888; cv=none; b=ikKlO79bTeaw/f7s4KyB3k7wrwLFSyF2g5XERNnAoSd3mrnJ5u9IbibvUsxmLeON6lTf0jVENlVs96zf9VpnMKD8UonvWJ5s3tRzynHjoCfkjbj6F79XEkynrjPW3DxZcCq/BAF9WHM1ClmJhBzhb1GJwDnvP5Zi+xqO5mgqdWE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749021888; c=relaxed/simple; bh=d5VGZY3wjHIhKCGDSeV6VZbiBPYwu9t4ayf8AO8OlwU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=t/uNeO0tEagujOPUnteyJffivUmpFoBFjo305mmyAtnM4hMecE9S9xqh/2QSMmytvWY40c8eAFS1sdS9DWO0LJ5Rn4eoyI3HOshQLDC0D2L2mEFmpBtfBSSeeTH4obd2+9stFpKHx1GxNXob4nVsPHGZOJV4m2Efv8bgiccQbsE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=odyy8wQ5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="odyy8wQ5" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DFD61C4CEE7; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 07:24:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1749021887; bh=d5VGZY3wjHIhKCGDSeV6VZbiBPYwu9t4ayf8AO8OlwU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=odyy8wQ5ON02zPffOE2SJpBxUwUYz5rmT5lsE2yOgNbb2cDXnIwb0ACfUhTX9uK8c bqVyvG+X44TOpZ6BjZz+yFBUGipEXDmEzroDs9BVd6rU1kd+cBPUWr4UygZJrRyDew 2CvhfHn6EhiRYyOc99eZpfidTitTHMZs/OH+xzIToCaZNP4v3VLaXeHt8xZCAG+AR1 HygqPF1tjl1zS5OKj2rvtKGX5HTGDoSj7qKMgGJEKYXjlNWHRkXg0QWLSlkBw8asQD FH64MJHBBiUK2uTUApfPhWXBcE6MzA63npN2mN7MtdGj9u9vf32BHi+hkcr+OfHtVx QFPWrpJi2/V7A== Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 09:24:38 +0200 From: Lorenzo Pieralisi To: Rob Herring Cc: Peter Maydell , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Marc Zyngier , Thomas Gleixner , Conor Dooley , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , andre.przywara@arm.com, Arnd Bergmann , Sascha Bischoff , Timothy Hayes , "Liam R. Howlett" , Mark Rutland , Jiri Slaby , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, suzuki.poulose@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/26] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: Add Arm GICv5 Message-ID: References: <20250513-gicv5-host-v4-0-b36e9b15a6c3@kernel.org> <20250513-gicv5-host-v4-1-b36e9b15a6c3@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 02:11:34PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 10:37 AM Peter Maydell wrote: > > > > On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 at 16:15, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 2:48 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 02:17:26PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > > > secure.txt says: > > > > > # The general principle of the naming scheme for Secure world bindings > > > > > # is that any property that needs a different value in the Secure world > > > > > # can be supported by prefixing the property name with "secure-". So for > > > > > # instance "secure-foo" would override "foo". > > > > > > Today I would say a 'secure-' prefix is a mistake. To my knowledge, > > > it's never been used anyways. But I don't have much visibility into > > > what secure world firmware is doing. > > > > QEMU uses it for communicating with the secure firmware if > > you run secure firmware on the virt board. It's done that > > since we introduced that binding. Indeed that use case is *why* > > the binding is there. It works fine for the intended purpose, > > which is "most devices are visible in both S and NS, but a few > > things are S only (UART, a bit of RAM, secure-only flash"). > > I meant "secure-" as a prefix allowed on *any* property, not > "secure-status" specifically, which is the only thing QEMU uses > AFAICT. IOW, I don't think we should be creating secure-reg, > secure-interrupts, secure-clocks, etc. Reading secure.txt, what does it mean "device present and usable in the secure world" ? So: status = "disabled" secure-status = "okay" basically means that the device in question allows secure-only MMIO access, is that what it says ? If that's the case and we really want to have all config frames in a single DT, would it be reasonable to have an IRS/ITS DT node per-frame ? Then yes, the secure- tag is not enough any longer (because we have to cope with 4 interrupt domains) but that's a separate problem - again, this would leave the current reviewed bindings unchanged. Other than that as I mentioned we could use (? aka clutching at straws) reg-names but I don't think it is correct to have in the DT address space that the CPU is not allowed to address. Lorenzo