mbox series

[RFC,0/2] Add examples of secure- prefixed property in documentation

Message ID 20200423064808.10468-1-etienne.carriere@linaro.org (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series Add examples of secure- prefixed property in documentation | expand

Message

Etienne Carriere April 23, 2020, 6:48 a.m. UTC 
Hello,

This is a proposal for adding a bit of description in the DT bindings
documentation of how secure- property prefix can be used for. The
changes in this patch series describe that for clocks and resets properties.

Documentation file arm/secure.txt already states that secure- prefix can be
used for any property hence the description proposed here are not mandated.
However it may be useful as explicit examples of such usage.

I will be very pleased to get your feedback in this changes.

Regards,

Etienne Carriere (2):
  dt-bindings: arm: Add secure-clocks binding description
  dt-bindings: arm: Add secure-resets binding description

 .../devicetree/bindings/arm/secure.txt        | 37 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)

Comments

Rob Herring April 24, 2020, 9:58 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 1:49 AM Etienne Carriere
<etienne.carriere@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This is a proposal for adding a bit of description in the DT bindings
> documentation of how secure- property prefix can be used for. The
> changes in this patch series describe that for clocks and resets properties.
>
> Documentation file arm/secure.txt already states that secure- prefix can be
> used for any property hence the description proposed here are not mandated.
> However it may be useful as explicit examples of such usage.

It may say that, but any new property has to be documented and
reviewed still. I'm not sure that anything in secure.txt has actually
gotten used.

You should participate in the System DT discussions in Linaro where
how to represent different CPUs and CPU execution environments (like
secure world) is being worked on.

Rob
Etienne Carriere April 26, 2020, 3:35 p.m. UTC | #2 
On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 23:59, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 1:49 AM Etienne Carriere
> <etienne.carriere@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is a proposal for adding a bit of description in the DT bindings
> > documentation of how secure- property prefix can be used for. The
> > changes in this patch series describe that for clocks and resets properties.
> >
> > Documentation file arm/secure.txt already states that secure- prefix can be
> > used for any property hence the description proposed here are not mandated.
> > However it may be useful as explicit examples of such usage.
>
> It may say that, but any new property has to be documented and
> reviewed still. I'm not sure that anything in secure.txt has actually
> gotten used.

Looking at Linux kernel, U-Boot, Qemu, EDK II, that's right :)
I guess that applies to the so-called non-secure world.

>
> You should participate in the System DT discussions in Linaro where
> how to represent different CPUs and CPU execution environments (like
> secure world) is being worked on.

Fair, I'll get information there.
Thank you for your prompt feedback.

In the same scope, I am to post a change in the Linux DTS files.
A change to define a new attribute mostly of interest for the secure
world description.
I will still post it to the LKML to get feedback about it.
Such new bindings should still be discussed in the Linux DT ML, right?

Regards,
Etienne

>
> Rob