Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200423064808.10468-1-etienne.carriere@linaro.org> <CAL_Jsq+zNyqcQ2xWceGLz4by=3rV=46wPyj=HcFPZ9pQPF17eg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL_Jsq+zNyqcQ2xWceGLz4by=3rV=46wPyj=HcFPZ9pQPF17eg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@linaro.org>
Date:   Sun, 26 Apr 2020 17:35:16 +0200
Message-ID: <CAN5uoS9qENztJcd1b4uUMW83+o57gkWE9gEpq3Qd2YV0STA1gA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add examples of secure- prefixed property in documentation
To:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

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