On Mon, 21 Dec 2020, François Ozog wrote:
Le lun. 21 déc. 2020 à 18:39, Rob Herring robherring2@gmail.com a écrit :
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 9:43 PM François Ozog francois.ozog@linaro.org wrote:
Hi
I assume this needs to be analyzed from System Device Tree perspective: https://trustedfirmware-a.readthedocs.io/en/latest/components/psa-ffa-manife...
That's not what we're reviewing upstream[1].
well I think it is still valid as Linux will not see the full system device tree. It will only see the part that is related to the partition.
But we may need some clarification...
The example on the mailing list is the following:
ffa { compatible = "arm,ffa-1.0";
ffa_partition0 { compatible = "arm,ffa-1.0-partition"; uuid = "12345678-9abc-def0-1234-56789abcdef0"; }; };
Also looking at [2], it is true that secure partitions look like something that we should be able to describe in system device tree. We have been focusing mostly on AMP in system device tree so far, but the goal is to describe hypervisors and secure world "execution domains" too. Secure partitions seem to be close enough to the concept to be describable with an "openamp,domain" compatible node.
[2] https://trustedfirmware-a.readthedocs.io/en/latest/components/secure-partiti...
Rob [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20201204121137.2966778-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com/ > > And this is to be included in the DT Technical Report. > > Cheers > > FF > > -- > François-Frédéric Ozog | *Director Linaro Edge & Fog Computing Group* > T: +33.67221.6485 > francois.ozog@linaro.org | Skype: ffozog > _______________________________________________ > boot-architecture mailing list > boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture-- [uc?id=0BxTAygkus3RgQVhuNHMwUi1mYWc&export=download] François-Frédéric Ozog | Director Linaro Edge & Fog Computing Group T: +33.67221.6485 francois.ozog@linaro.org | Skype: ffozog