Re: [PATCH v7 1/9] coco/tsm: Introduce a core device for TEE Security Managers

[<dan.j.williams@intel.com>]

Carlos López wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 10/24/25 4:04 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > A "TSM" is a platform component that provides an API for securely
> > provisioning resources for a confidential guest (TVM) to consume. The
> > name originates from the PCI specification for platform agent that
> > carries out operations for PCIe TDISP (TEE Device Interface Security
> > Protocol).
> > 
> > Instances of this core device are parented by a device representing the
> > platform security function like CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_CCP or
> > CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_HOST.
> > 
> > This device interface is a frontend to the aspects of a TSM and TEE I/O
> > that are cross-architecture common. This includes mechanisms like
> > enumerating available platform TEE I/O capabilities and provisioning
> > connections between the platform TSM and device DSMs (Device Security
> > Manager (TDISP)).
> > 
> > For now this is just the scaffolding for registering a TSM device sysfs
> > interface.
> > 
> > Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@amd.com>
> > Cc: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
> > Co-developed-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
> > Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
[..]
> > diff --git a/drivers/virt/coco/tsm-core.c b/drivers/virt/coco/tsm-core.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..a64b776642cf
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/virt/coco/tsm-core.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +/* Copyright(c) 2024 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. */
> > +
> > +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> > +
> > +#include <linux/tsm.h>
> > +#include <linux/idr.h>
> > +#include <linux/rwsem.h>
> > +#include <linux/device.h>
> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
> > +
> > +static struct class *tsm_class;
> > +static DECLARE_RWSEM(tsm_rwsem);
> > +static DEFINE_IDR(tsm_idr);
> 
> The IDR documentation states it is deprecated and one should use XArray
> in its place. Is there any particular reason to use IDR instead in this
> patch series?

No, not really. I forgot that IDR is not just an xarray wrapper like
IDA. Will switch and would not say "no" to someone teaching checkpatch
to flag new IDR usage. Save others missing that note in
Documentation/core-api/idr.rst.