Re: [PATCH v25 0/7] firmware: imx: driver for NXP secure-enclave

Re: [PATCH v25 0/7] firmware: imx: driver for NXP secure-enclave

[Frieder Schrempf]

On 24.02.26 12:18, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
> On 29.01.26 17:58, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
>> Hi Shawn,
>>
>> This is a gentle follow‑up regarding the patch-set.
>>
>> In v25, I addressed all automated feedback from kernel CI (warning fixes and checkpatch‑strict resolution), with no further changes requested by reviewers.
>> Patch 5/7 has also received a Reviewed-by tag from Frank Li (NXP).
>>
>> I have not seen additional feedback.
>> I would appreciate any update on the review/merge status, or guidance on further changes needed to move the series forward.
>>
>> Thanks for your time and continued support.
> 
> How close are we to getting this patchset merged? Work on this has been
> ongoing for almost three years now and it would be really helpful to
> have this in the kernel.
> 
> Thanks!

Gentle ping! Can someone please provide information on what needs to be
done to get this merged?

Thanks!

Re: [PATCH v25 0/7] firmware: imx: driver for NXP secure-enclave

[Frank Li]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 09:52:13AM +0200, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
> On 24.02.26 12:18, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
> > On 29.01.26 17:58, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> >> Hi Shawn,
> >>
> >> This is a gentle follow‑up regarding the patch-set.
> >>
> >> In v25, I addressed all automated feedback from kernel CI (warning fixes and checkpatch‑strict resolution), with no further changes requested by reviewers.
> >> Patch 5/7 has also received a Reviewed-by tag from Frank Li (NXP).
> >>
> >> I have not seen additional feedback.
> >> I would appreciate any update on the review/merge status, or guidance on further changes needed to move the series forward.
> >>
> >> Thanks for your time and continued support.
> >
> > How close are we to getting this patchset merged? Work on this has been
> > ongoing for almost three years now and it would be really helpful to
> > have this in the kernel.
> >
> > Thanks!
>
> Gentle ping! Can someone please provide information on what needs to be
> done to get this merged?

Thank you test this. I just took over imx ownship from shawn.  I need get
famillar with work flow and get dts part merge smoothly.

I will try to send this as independent pull request at earily of v7.1

Frank

>
> Thanks!

Re: (subset) [PATCH v25 0/7] firmware: imx: driver for NXP secure-enclave

[Frank Li]

On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 17:19:12 +0530, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> The NXP's i.MX EdgeLock Enclave, a HW IP creating an embedded secure
> enclave within the SoC boundary to enable features like
> - HSM
> - SHE
> - V2X
> 
> Communicates via message unit with linux kernel. This driver is
> enables communication ensuring well defined message sequence protocol
> between Application Core and enclave's firmware.
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/7] Documentation/firmware: add imx/se to other_interfaces
      commit: 3b4531c6e0f4c8874f0266853a410438eda1fc24
[2/7] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add imx-se-fw binding doc
      commit: 4d7bcf0869686d7d7fbf16244453b987e5ca6d14
[3/7] firmware: imx: add driver for NXP EdgeLock Enclave
      commit: 338529a73c2bf2c277013b745cfe6f19b84b70af
[4/7] firmware: imx: device context dedicated to priv
      commit: 2d733ed67f608ee85abb854157011f88d7f280a8
[5/7] firmware: drivers: imx: adds miscdev
      commit: 4de71839142b5f43846e3593f4eb236e1d733885

Best regards,
-- 
Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>

Re: [PATCH v25 5/7] firmware: drivers: imx: adds miscdev

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thu, Jan 22, 2026, at 12:49, Pankaj Gupta wrote:

> +/* IOCTL definitions. */
> +
> +struct se_ioctl_setup_iobuf {
> +	void __user *user_buf;
> +	__u32 length;
> +	__u32 flags;
> +	__u64 ele_addr;
> +};
> +
> +struct se_ioctl_cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info {
> +	__u32 __user *tx_buf;
> +	int tx_buf_sz;
> +	__u32 __user *rx_buf;
> +	int rx_buf_sz;


These just showed up in linux-next and triggered warnings
in my (still private) uapi checks:

./usr/include/linux/se_ioctl.h:22:15: error: padding struct to align 'ele_addr' [-Werror=padded]
   22 |         __u64 ele_addr;
      |               ^~~~~~~~

./usr/include/linux/se_ioctl.h:45:16: error: padding struct to align 'rx_buf' [-Werror=padded]
   45 |         __u32 *rx_buf;
      |                ^~~~~~
./usr/include/linux/se_ioctl.h:47:1: error: padding struct size to alignment boundary with 4 bytes [-Werror=padded]
   47 | };


The problem here is the use of indirect pointers, which are nor
recommended in ABI structures because of the implied padding and
the need for compat mode handlers, see
Documentation/driver-api/ioctl.rst.

I think the fixup below should address all of this, but I
have not reviewed the driver in detail to see if thats's all.

I also noticed that the __user annotations are inconsistent,
so please also run this through 'make C=1' and fix up the
warnings you get.

    Arnd

diff --git a/drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.c b/drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.c
index 2ba0a6988a39..d0e3d981d1e0 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/imx/se_ctrl.c
@@ -384,7 +384,7 @@ static int add_b_desc_to_pending_list(void *shared_ptr_with_pos,
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	b_desc->shared_buf_ptr = shared_ptr_with_pos;
-	b_desc->usr_buf_ptr = io->user_buf;
+	b_desc->usr_buf_ptr = u64_to_user_ptr(io->user_buf);
 	b_desc->size = io->length;
 
 	if (io->flags & SE_IO_BUF_FLAGS_IS_INPUT) {
@@ -526,13 +526,13 @@ static int se_ioctl_cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_handler(struct se_if_device_ctx *dev_ctx,
 	}
 
 	if (cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.tx_buf_sz < SE_MU_HDR_SZ) {
-		dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: User buffer too small(%d < %d)",
+		dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: User buffer too small(%lld < %d)",
 			dev_ctx->devname, cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.tx_buf_sz, SE_MU_HDR_SZ);
 		se_ioctl_cmd_snd_rcv_cleanup(dev_ctx, uarg, &cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info);
 		return -ENOSPC;
 	}
 
-	err = se_chk_tx_msg_hdr(priv, (struct se_msg_hdr *)cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.tx_buf);
+	err = se_chk_tx_msg_hdr(priv, u64_to_user_ptr(cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.tx_buf));
 	if (err) {
 		se_ioctl_cmd_snd_rcv_cleanup(dev_ctx, uarg, &cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info);
 		return err;
@@ -546,7 +546,7 @@ static int se_ioctl_cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_handler(struct se_if_device_ctx *dev_ctx,
 	}
 
 	struct se_api_msg *tx_msg __free(kfree) =
-		memdup_user(cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.tx_buf,
+		memdup_user(u64_to_user_ptr(cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.tx_buf),
 			    cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.tx_buf_sz);
 	if (IS_ERR(tx_msg)) {
 		err = PTR_ERR(tx_msg);
@@ -593,8 +593,8 @@ static int se_ioctl_cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_handler(struct se_if_device_ctx *dev_ctx,
 	print_hex_dump_debug("to user ", DUMP_PREFIX_OFFSET, 4, 4, rx_msg,
 			     cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.rx_buf_sz, false);
 
-	if (copy_to_user(cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.rx_buf, rx_msg,
-			 cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.rx_buf_sz)) {
+	if (copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.rx_buf),
+			 rx_msg, cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info.rx_buf_sz)) {
 		dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: Failed to copy to user.", dev_ctx->devname);
 		err = -EFAULT;
 	}
@@ -655,7 +655,7 @@ static int se_ioctl_setup_iobuf_handler(struct se_if_device_ctx *dev_ctx,
 		return -EFAULT;
 	}
 
-	dev_dbg(dev_ctx->priv->dev, "%s: io [buf: %p(%d) flag: %x].", dev_ctx->devname,
+	dev_dbg(dev_ctx->priv->dev, "%s: io [buf: %llx(%d) flag: %x].", dev_ctx->devname,
 		io.user_buf, io.length, io.flags);
 
 	if (io.length == 0 || !io.user_buf) {
@@ -696,7 +696,8 @@ static int se_ioctl_setup_iobuf_handler(struct se_if_device_ctx *dev_ctx,
 		 * buffer is input:
 		 * copy data from user space to this allocated buffer.
 		 */
-		if (copy_from_user(shared_mem->ptr + pos, io.user_buf, io.length)) {
+		if (copy_from_user(shared_mem->ptr + pos,
+				   u64_to_user_ptr(io.user_buf), io.length)) {
 			dev_err(dev_ctx->priv->dev,
 				"%s: Failed copy data to shared memory.",
 				dev_ctx->devname);
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/se_ioctl.h b/include/uapi/linux/se_ioctl.h
index 0c948bdc8c26..9fb81cb72b94 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/se_ioctl.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/se_ioctl.h
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
 /* IOCTL definitions. */
 
 struct se_ioctl_setup_iobuf {
-	void __user *user_buf;
+	__u64 user_buf;
 	__u32 length;
 	__u32 flags;
 	__u64 ele_addr;
@@ -40,10 +40,10 @@ struct se_ioctl_get_if_info {
 };
 
 struct se_ioctl_cmd_snd_rcv_rsp_info {
-	__u32 __user *tx_buf;
-	int tx_buf_sz;
-	__u32 __user *rx_buf;
-	int rx_buf_sz;
+	__u64 tx_buf;
+	__u64 tx_buf_sz;
+	__u64 rx_buf;
+	__u64 rx_buf_sz;
 };
 
 struct se_ioctl_get_soc_info {