+ TEE ML
Hi Sasha,
Firstly apologies for my comments here as I recently joined linux-integrity ML so I don't have other patches in my inbox. Also, it would be nice if you could cc TEE ML in future patches, so that people are aware of such interesting use-cases and may provide some feedback.
On Tue, 7 May 2019 at 23:10, Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 11:56:34AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
From: "Sasha Levin (Microsoft)" sashal@kernel.org
Changes since v2:
- Drop the devicetree bindings patch (we don't add any new ones).
- More code cleanups based on Jason Gunthorpe's review.
Sasha Levin (2): ftpm: firmware TPM running in TEE ftpm: add documentation for ftpm driver
Ping? Does anyone have any objections to this?
From [PATCH v3 1/2] ftpm: firmware TPM running in TEE:
+static const struct of_device_id of_ftpm_tee_ids[] = {
- { .compatible = "microsoft,ftpm" },
- { }
+}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, of_ftpm_tee_ids);
+static struct platform_driver ftpm_tee_driver = {
- .driver = {
- .name = DRIVER_NAME,
- .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(of_ftpm_tee_ids),
- },
- .probe = ftpm_tee_probe,
- .remove = ftpm_tee_remove,
+};
+module_platform_driver(ftpm_tee_driver);
Here this fTPM driver (seems to communicate with OP-TEE based TA) should register on TEE bus [1] rather than platform bus as its actual dependency is on TEE driver rather than using deferred probe to meet its dependency. Have a look at OP-TEE based RNG driver here [2].
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i... [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i...
-Sumit
-- Thanks, Sasha
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 10:11:54AM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
- TEE ML
Hi Sasha,
Firstly apologies for my comments here as I recently joined linux-integrity ML so I don't have other patches in my inbox. Also, it would be nice if you could cc TEE ML in future patches, so that people are aware of such interesting use-cases and may provide some feedback.
If this kind is desire exists then shouldn't it be captured in MAINTAINERS?
Daniel.
On Tue, 7 May 2019 at 23:10, Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 11:56:34AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
From: "Sasha Levin (Microsoft)" sashal@kernel.org
Changes since v2:
- Drop the devicetree bindings patch (we don't add any new ones).
- More code cleanups based on Jason Gunthorpe's review.
Sasha Levin (2): ftpm: firmware TPM running in TEE ftpm: add documentation for ftpm driver
Ping? Does anyone have any objections to this?
From [PATCH v3 1/2] ftpm: firmware TPM running in TEE:
+static const struct of_device_id of_ftpm_tee_ids[] = {
- { .compatible = "microsoft,ftpm" },
- { }
+}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, of_ftpm_tee_ids);
+static struct platform_driver ftpm_tee_driver = {
- .driver = {
- .name = DRIVER_NAME,
- .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(of_ftpm_tee_ids),
- },
- .probe = ftpm_tee_probe,
- .remove = ftpm_tee_remove,
+};
+module_platform_driver(ftpm_tee_driver);
Here this fTPM driver (seems to communicate with OP-TEE based TA) should register on TEE bus [1] rather than platform bus as its actual dependency is on TEE driver rather than using deferred probe to meet its dependency. Have a look at OP-TEE based RNG driver here [2].
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i... [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i...
-Sumit
-- Thanks, Sasha
On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 13:32, Daniel Thompson daniel.thompson@linaro.org wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 10:11:54AM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
- TEE ML
Hi Sasha,
Firstly apologies for my comments here as I recently joined linux-integrity ML so I don't have other patches in my inbox. Also, it would be nice if you could cc TEE ML in future patches, so that people are aware of such interesting use-cases and may provide some feedback.
If this kind is desire exists then shouldn't it be captured in MAINTAINERS?
Makes sense, will send a patch to capture it in MAINTAINERS file.
-Sumit
Daniel.
On Tue, 7 May 2019 at 23:10, Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 11:56:34AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
From: "Sasha Levin (Microsoft)" sashal@kernel.org
Changes since v2:
- Drop the devicetree bindings patch (we don't add any new ones).
- More code cleanups based on Jason Gunthorpe's review.
Sasha Levin (2): ftpm: firmware TPM running in TEE ftpm: add documentation for ftpm driver
Ping? Does anyone have any objections to this?
From [PATCH v3 1/2] ftpm: firmware TPM running in TEE:
+static const struct of_device_id of_ftpm_tee_ids[] = {
- { .compatible = "microsoft,ftpm" },
- { }
+}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, of_ftpm_tee_ids);
+static struct platform_driver ftpm_tee_driver = {
- .driver = {
- .name = DRIVER_NAME,
- .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(of_ftpm_tee_ids),
- },
- .probe = ftpm_tee_probe,
- .remove = ftpm_tee_remove,
+};
+module_platform_driver(ftpm_tee_driver);
Here this fTPM driver (seems to communicate with OP-TEE based TA) should register on TEE bus [1] rather than platform bus as its actual dependency is on TEE driver rather than using deferred probe to meet its dependency. Have a look at OP-TEE based RNG driver here [2].
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i... [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i...
-Sumit
-- Thanks, Sasha
-
Daniel Thompson -
Sumit Garg