From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zeus03.de (zeus03.de [194.117.254.33]) (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 A5DD6370AFF for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2026 08:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783844015; cv=none; b=qhPI/qkkpYIYtW3cm5/mAMf/W/9FSaa9eOBJ5YP4nLvgBu/z81akV8cuTwVJ+3TKtAfNdBBwVz3h/DTlTyLuCDDp2k5SSI7IlwGgWt62zPm9c8bDVJboqxW7KnPJMphuHVtHFIpFqCZF5Zmxj1GU9HR0d0wQCwnCEgpsdCe0O60= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783844015; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HJd/iyE1L08rvgqBeJSEVBvoYo+Y5iwJ7CrdeDu+mQo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=MDpHn9GSdtfV9gExhCIKeaBYOQb6/NvZl6ZWt9JiUQ0hcdxf7NJ/m1KFWe04OYkOTlmQQ2jHx9BO5xDdLy70B4EUyeT0d6qflqZWf2nx4bVcQrmcwxNd7/ak2xEmRN16gCWIBcy9kwyQ42Q+bzmv+XUVv8ZIC3IwkojApwWjp+8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b=mearCb4N; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b="mearCb4N" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sang-engineering.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=k1; bh=HJd/ iyE1L08rvgqBeJSEVBvoYo+Y5iwJ7CrdeDu+mQo=; b=mearCb4NG7+DUb1Zp5EZ BcesaZp9IZ/wDmjuxZ3Ev9hA//yR3u10f4qYzQmU3ld2nq04ir41T70vHjyOAtGz 1sQhB/3XDWji9QSg5SebEt1ESkcSfcOckQ2sqGwZujSN3Mfwe8C8j0HzgqQLJokY kPk0awVwGeu1iH3kxE18+nuNG6uIoXPa+X7HGPdkjKY+fhM+zp2gp9x43yEI6aTQ k1COp5N71ws16cQ4URCiOgecUIZmGEHf8IUhujtAN4CESReXkYpb5Zir8l+H/SZi IUtFAtCxeRhq+FVT9UBVJGMJYDNJnW6jN5dOb4pM3tl3RR5ZUpDu4JDFz7g79PKB uQ== Received: (qmail 2159428 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2026 10:13:30 +0200 Received: by mail.zeus03.de with ESMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 12 Jul 2026 10:13:30 +0200 X-UD-Smtp-Session: l3s3148p1@x+eQjGVW6Lsujnun Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2026 10:13:30 +0200 From: Wolfram Sang To: "Miquel Raynal (Schneider Electric)" Cc: Olivia Mackall , Herbert Xu , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Jayesh Choudhary , Thomas Petazzoni , Pascal EBERHARD , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] hwrng: omap: Enable on Renesas RZ/N1D Message-ID: References: <20260710-schneider-v7-2-rc1-eip76-upstream-v2-0-4eab557b0e70@bootlin.com> <20260710-schneider-v7-2-rc1-eip76-upstream-v2-2-4eab557b0e70@bootlin.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HvtI8ZeixoIEYXu9" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260710-schneider-v7-2-rc1-eip76-upstream-v2-2-4eab557b0e70@bootlin.com> --HvtI8ZeixoIEYXu9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 08:20:33PM +0200, Miquel Raynal (Schneider Electric= ) wrote: > The Kconfig symbol and associated seem to be badly named as they have > nothing OMAP specific but instead refer to Inside Secure Safexcel > devices which have been used in many SoCs from different > manufacturers (like OMAP, Marvell but also eg. Renesas). >=20 > The Renesas RZ/N1D features this IP, so add this architecture to the > dependency allow list. In practice this dependency list does not seem > very relevant and could be entirely dropped, given the fact that this IP > has been implemented by many different vendors and seems to be > architecture agnostic. I thought the same. But I am also fine with adding one more: Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang --HvtI8ZeixoIEYXu9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEOZGx6rniZ1Gk92RdFA3kzBSgKbYFAmpTTKoACgkQFA3kzBSg KbaTMw//cwOJonuD2ZlfeuRusk00ZjdhM/N/aDKZxt/JTatIS4kWvQDwZwQSzdMD h+HJstrlCW8MseQ4k12KJOpqs2H7Qd7wVvaNUTDJnSIeb6JqiRobqq59HItwTfp7 6EP7JuDtX8VCXaUf+WdNg90zpGn4BQ6IshiuWJJuuVceHNlnTbVywMl90CjX2VVl IQiyuSEOuV5K37bvSmldtnfdqikin6k5tl+adi6dtWXsw/MkIwE5DwSBs6b6vahW 2ydth49rXR1qPY+TuMFfSs10aHl5Jm8AfADZNv6RMrTyJ/wi5K5EBRrYYP5imfV1 oMnFGmWwxIqjRZpKvvdhX7OvFLmZc+zvw3fdSKF2sq06Iv2Udaa+VuFw/CsqJu4/ YZ4l8t7vgrUBTBk6Tc6wESKIzygKSCdCrorA41KwFYI05Borcm0IOhSHaF+/fehB RSD/tzH9X3h/4O/GnjVFK91gt/7AjOMzJV3nbi8UmqjBDIt3G7UVTqF+rL5MGbfB jUkfr/6pUiayDJ3YBxaylc1ac2kgMJs8xuGnhsqduOi/T5PBble9uQa81W8jFynK agWs3QC80bvpJVzmsJf7wUUrqKD28DTSNvitwA44g5G0ICdE7iVdiSMXze/OskwD tyn8VNwLNoa82ooQPfegiCUHo+cSA1MA6aOL//Tk1uJh1iaYN54= =0RyS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HvtI8ZeixoIEYXu9--