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 86537313264; Wed, 17 Dec 2025 07:55:57 +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=1765958157; cv=none; b=Wr7408CjKwmcJb9V3lDsIgh+isc/oxglNPgVFZEHgE5iSK2NlJ4QdEALWQUtXD3ISyfP3ofnAN2bVgYQAW7rXwrML1+64ybWzbLGQjnFuwmV/GBbXZW4l7FKzhM5Tt6OSM7yEAbYKWRVfFVKS214s+keNPq7ksuQbkhGp97Ybmg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765958157; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Xo9c1qEYiQMSvCEooBFQkEOr2bYPsShQNIttr2X1DG8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WPfMXK5DTKOSa1/ubqkw3Ft5S8CalKuzCjpDHdalvaDGTOPIiY2p/khF+VfurDoyQ7uaIYNz03ILYAZNU/WUiSKP3FVbMwyx63BtozfF6gmMOeWQjLrIFHSdHZ23qCFOOOZr+ZPAa+9yaJthxSa0sH+7akvrRkIRAiE2dSwhdK8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ELlSPoe4; 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="ELlSPoe4" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69B78C4CEF5; Wed, 17 Dec 2025 07:55:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1765958157; bh=Xo9c1qEYiQMSvCEooBFQkEOr2bYPsShQNIttr2X1DG8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ELlSPoe46Vp/wKpVK3LLNZx61ZRTeN9a8aiwZ+dBOq6JSgu8lT1rxJ3wY80rxeXhw OZrPCLpEBFk6TLKFBA5pONUweIEe6/iPED+L08U/dXepE25vl89hRZiQ/FCns7UqdC coya/6tg0ImJ/cGQDCryPzjE8vQi9Nqu3aUuHEAmYgRVp1m3qEkelGkvr/TPOrnFV9 yhPHmKfYuEbW8BihXNYfIx3rYzf4yaVAhlcte6H35pz0VG5SbKINKXAIGTAmOGvHIK XqbbXlo5Mxru1Gcnu0BaAUfhCIDC3t50dTRFkXYmmP/w7QngJootP/5QLOgvwTke2k Z91VDTNTIflIw== Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 13:25:39 +0530 From: Sumit Garg To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Cc: Sumit Garg , Jens Wiklander , Olivia Mackall , Herbert Xu , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Cl=E9ment_L=E9ger?= , Alexandre Belloni , Ard Biesheuvel , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Ilias Apalodimas , Jan Kiszka , Sudeep Holla , Christophe JAILLET , Michael Chan , Pavan Chebbi , =?utf-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= , James Bottomley , Jarkko Sakkinen , Mimi Zohar , David Howells , Paul Moore , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Peter Huewe , op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Cristian Marussi , arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/17] tee: Use bus callbacks instead of driver callbacks Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@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, Dec 16, 2025 at 12:08:38PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 01:08:38PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 3:02 PM Uwe Kleine-König > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 04:54:11PM +0900, Sumit Garg wrote: > > > > Feel free to make the tee_bus_type private as the last patch in the series > > > > such that any followup driver follows this clean approach. > > > > > > There is a bit more to do for that than I'm willing to invest. With my > > > patch series applied `tee_bus_type` is still used in > > > drivers/tee/optee/device.c and drivers/tee/tee_core.c. > > > > Oh I see, I guess we need to come with some helpers around device > > register/unregister from TEE subsystem as well. Let's plan that for a > > followup patch-set, I don't want this patch-set to be bloated more. > > Don't consider me in for that. But it sounds like a nice addition. > No worries, the current cleanup is fine for now. > > > Maybe it's > > > sensible to merge these two files into a single one. > > > > It's not possible as the design for TEE bus is to have TEE > > implementation drivers like OP-TEE, AMD-TEE, TS-TEE, QTEE and so on to > > register devices on the bus. > > So only OP-TEE uses the bus for devices and the other *-TEE don't. Also > sounds like something worth to be fixed. The TEE bus is common for all the TEE implementation drivers which need to support kernel TEE client drivers. I am aware there will be QTEE and TS-TEE from past discussion that they will be exposing devices on the TEE bus. > > > > The things I wonder about additionally are: > > > > > > - if CONFIG_OPTEE=n and CONFIG_TEE=y|m the tee bus is only used for > > > drivers but not devices. > > > > Yeah since the devices are rather added by the TEE implementation driver. > > > > > > > > - optee_register_device() calls device_create_file() on > > > &optee_device->dev after device_register(&optee_device->dev). > > > (Attention half-knowledge!) I think device_create_file() should not > > > be called on an already registered device (or you have to send a > > > uevent afterwards). This should probably use type attribute groups. > > > (Or the need_supplicant attribute should be dropped as it isn't very > > > useful. This would maybe be considered an ABI change however.) > > > > The reasoning for this attribute should be explained by commit: > > 7269cba53d90 ("tee: optee: Fix supplicant based device enumeration"). > > In summary it's due to a weird dependency for devices we have with the > > user-space daemon: tee-supplicant. > > From reading that once I don't understand it. (But no need to explain > :-) > > Still the file should better be added before device_add() is called. Noted, let me see if I can get to fix this until someone jumps in before me. > > > > - Why does optee_probe() in drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c unregister all > > > optee devices in its error path (optee_unregister_devices())? > > > > This is mostly to take care of if any device got registered before the > > failure occured. Let me know if you have a better way to address that. > > Without understanding the tee stuff, I'd say: Don't bother and only undo > the things that probe did before the failure. > True, but this is special case where if there is any leftover device registered from the TEE implementation then it is likely going to cause the corresponding kernel client driver crash. -Sumit