Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] scsi: ufs: core: Add OP-TEE based RPMB driver for UFS devices

[Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>]

On Wed, 2025-10-01 at 10:06 +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
> > From: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>
> > 
> > This patch adds OP-TEE based RPMB support for UFS devices. This enables
> > secure RPMB operations on UFS devices through OP-TEE, providing the same
> > functionality available for eMMC devices and extending kernel-based secure
> > storage support to UFS-based systems.
> > 
> > Benefits of OP-TEE based RPMB implementation:
> > - Eliminates dependency on userspace supplicant for RPMB access
> > - Enables early boot secure storage access (e.g., fTPM, secure UEFI
> > variables)
> > - Provides kernel-level RPMB access as soon as UFS driver is initialized
> > - Removes complex initramfs dependencies and boot ordering requirements
> > - Ensures reliable and deterministic secure storage operations
> > - Supports both built-in and modular fTPM configurations
> > 
> > Co-developed-by: Can Guo <can.guo@oss.qualcomm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Can Guo <can.guo@oss.qualcomm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>
> Reviewed-by: Avri Altman <avri.altman@sandisk.com>
> 
> Nit: Would it make sense to simplify things, e.g. :
> Instead of struct list_head rpmbs;
> Use:
> struct ufs_rpmb_dev *rpmbs[4];


Hi Avri, 

I am working on the next version, seems we should keep struct list_head rpmbs. 

On the hot path, runtime RPMB I/O operations use dev_get_drvdata(dev) to get the
device pointer directly, never searching through hba->rpmbs. Array's O(1) direct
access advantage is therefore irrelevant. and the list is only accessed during
probe/remove (one-time operations at boot/shutdown) where performance
differences are negligible. The list iterates only over active regions without
NULL checks, while an array requires checking all 4 slots.

List uses 16 bytes per active region, array uses 32 bytes (4 × 8-byte pointers)
regardless of how many regions are active, most of UFS devices only enabled 1-2
RPMB regions, making the list more memory-efficient, right?


how do you think?

Kind regards,
Bean