Hi Herbert,
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 10:34 AM Jens Wiklander
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Uses the new simplified tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf() function instead of
> the old deprecated tee_shm_alloc() function which required specific
> TEE_SHM-flags.
>
> Reviewed-by: Sumit Garg <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Wiklander <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/char/hw_random/optee-rng.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Since this patch depends on other patches in this patch set and vice
versa is it OK if I take this patch via my tree? I'm aiming for v5.18
with this.
Thanks,
Jens
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/optee-rng.c b/drivers/char/hw_random/optee-rng.c
> index 135a82590923..a948c0727b2b 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/optee-rng.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/optee-rng.c
> @@ -145,10 +145,10 @@ static int optee_rng_init(struct hwrng *rng)
> struct optee_rng_private *pvt_data = to_optee_rng_private(rng);
> struct tee_shm *entropy_shm_pool = NULL;
>
> - entropy_shm_pool = tee_shm_alloc(pvt_data->ctx, MAX_ENTROPY_REQ_SZ,
> - TEE_SHM_MAPPED | TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF);
> + entropy_shm_pool = tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf(pvt_data->ctx,
> + MAX_ENTROPY_REQ_SZ);
> if (IS_ERR(entropy_shm_pool)) {
> - dev_err(pvt_data->dev, "tee_shm_alloc failed\n");
> + dev_err(pvt_data->dev, "tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf failed\n");
> return PTR_ERR(entropy_shm_pool);
> }
>
> --
> 2.31.1
>