Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] ufs: rpmb: route OP-TEE RPMB secure storage over UFS

[Jorge Ramirez <jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 07/09/26 13:36:08, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2026 at 09:16:36PM +0200, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
> > On 07/09/26 10:13:39, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 07, 2026 at 10:40:59AM +0200, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
> > > > On 07/09/26 12:47:39, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
> > > > > Hi Jorge
> > > > >
> > > > > On 07/09/26 12:38, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
> > > > > > On 27/08/26 11:01:41, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
> > > > > >> On 21/08/26 16:02:18, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
> > > > > >>> On 17/08/26 16:38:40, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
> > > > > >>>> On 07/08/26 16:01:05, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> OP-TEE secure storage (CFG_RPMB_FS) relies on an RPMB partition, but
> > > > > >>>>> U-Boot's OP-TEE RPMB supplicant only speaks the legacy single-command
> > > > > >>>>> interface, which is bound to eMMC. SoCs that are UFS-only and have no
> > > > > >>>>> eMMC (for example the Qualcomm SA8775P) therefore cannot back OP-TEE
> > > > > >>>>> secure storage from U-Boot today. This series adds that support.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> It introduces the transport-agnostic OP-TEE RPMB "subsystem" interface
> > > > > >>>>> (PROBE_RESET / PROBE_NEXT / FRAMES), where the normal world enumerates
> > > > > >>>>> the RPMB device and reports its kind, size and CID, then carries the
> > > > > >>>>> signed frames. The legacy eMMC supplicant is preserved unchanged, only
> > > > > >>>>> renamed to rpmb_emmc.c, with the new UFS backend added as a separate
> > > > > >>>>> rpmb_ufs.c; the two are mutually exclusive via Kconfig (SUPPORT_UFS_RPMB
> > > > > >>>>> depends on !SUPPORT_EMMC_RPMB) because the OP-TEE supplicant handles a
> > > > > >>>>> single RPMB transport. The subsystem interface is UFS-only for now; eMMC
> > > > > >>>>> can be migrated onto it later as the legacy path is retired.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On top of that it adds a UFS RPMB transport that moves JEDEC RPMB frames
> > > > > >>>>> to and from the RPMB Well-Known LUN using SCSI SECURITY PROTOCOL IN/OUT.
> > > > > >>>>> The per-region 16-byte CID is derived by BLAKE2b-hashing the exact
> > > > > >>>>> device-id string the Linux kernel builds (ufshcd_create_device_id()
> > > > > >>>>> plus a "-R<region>" suffix), so OP-TEE derives an RPMB key that matches
> > > > > >>>>> the one Linux would use.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> The first patch is a standalone UFS descriptor fix the RPMB path depends
> > > > > >>>>> on (UTF-16BE string decoding); the transport patches also include a
> > > > > >>>>> power-on UNIT ATTENTION retry and a DMA-alignment bounce for the RPMB
> > > > > >>>>> WLUN.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Note: reading UFS descriptors reliably also requires the descriptor
> > > > > >>>>> data-segment cache-invalidation fix, which has already been posted and
> > > > > >>>>> merged separately, so this series is based on top of it.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Tested on the Qualcomm IQ-9075-EVK (SA8775P): OP-TEE with CFG_RPMB_FS
> > > > > >>>>> programs the RPMB key through U-Boot and reads/writes secure-storage
> > > > > >>>>> objects, with the derived CID matching the Linux UFS device_id ABI.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Dependencies:
> > > > > >>>>> Linux kernel:
> > > > > >>>>>  https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/20260716083728.2226422-1-jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com/
> > > > > >>>>> Op-tee
> > > > > >>>>>  https://github.com/OP-TEE/optee_os/pull/7881
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> v4:
> > > > > >>>>>  - ufs: decode string descriptors: dropped the in-place
> > > > > >>>>>    ufshcd_str_desc_to_cpu() byte-swap helper; instead added an endian
> > > > > >>>>>    argument to utf16_to_utf8() (UTF16_HOST/LITTLE/BIG_ENDIAN) and decode
> > > > > >>>>>    with UTF16_BIG_ENDIAN, mirroring the kernel's utf16s_to_utf8s().
> > > > > >>>>>    Existing EFI callers pass UTF16_HOST_ENDIAN.
> > > > > >>>>>  - ufs: RPMB transport: build the SECURITY PROTOCOL CDB with
> > > > > >>>>>    put_unaligned_be16()/put_unaligned_be32(); drop the
> > > > > >>>>>    rpmb_frame_request() helper in favour of get_unaligned_be16(); move
> > > > > >>>>>    ufs_rpmb_read_geometry() to the patch that first uses it so it is not
> > > > > >>>>>    an unused static function during git bisect.
> > > > > >>>>>  - ufs: per-region CID/size: reject an out-of-range device-reported
> > > > > >>>>>    logical block size before shifting and split the size computation into
> > > > > >>>>>    separate statements for readability; order <u-boot/...> after
> > > > > >>>>>    <linux/...>; note that the serial hex encoding matches the kernel
> > > > > >>>>>    device-id ABI.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> any further comments, is it ok to merge?
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> EOW reminder - this has been pending for a long while
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> anyone care to comment please?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > kernel changes accepted and op-tee changes merged.
> > > > > > Just this one pending with no comments for nearly a month.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > maybe we can merge?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks
> > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks like you're sending to the old mailing list instead of
> > > > > u-boot@lists.u-boot-project.org
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > hi Neah,
> > > > 
> > > > ah interesting, maybe that explains it depending on people'w workflows: I see it hasnt landed on u-boot lore's.
> > > > 
> > > > I just run get_maintainers.pl and the recommended list is
> > > > 
> > > > jramirez@trex:u-boot (ufs-rpmb.v4 $) $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl drivers/tee/optee/Makefile
> > > > Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@linaro.org> (maintainer:TEE)
> > > > Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org> (maintainer:TEE,commit_signer:2/3=67%)
> > > > Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> (maintainer:THE REST,authored:1/3=33%,added_lines:1/3=33%,removed_lines:1/2=50%)
> > > > Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com> (commit_signer:2/3=67%,authored:2/3=67%,added_lines:2/3=67%,removed_lines:1/2=50%)
> > > > u-boot@lists.denx.de (open list)...
> > > > 
> > > > still I can see it on patchworks with Neil being the gatekeeper.
> > > 
> > > Is your tree out of date? That's not what it shows here, we updated that
> > > a while ago.
> > 
> > not as long as this series apparently.. plus maintainers were in copy
> > and actively reviewing v1/v2/v3
> > 
> > but yeah, These patches were developed on top of "ece349ade29 Prepare
> > v2026.07" when the development started (so before the list was
> > updated). 
> > 
> > anyway, so what is the next step. resend posting as v5 on top of
> > v2026.10-x ?
> 
> Does v4 apply cleanly to the current next branch?
>

yes it does

> -- 
> Tom