Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191105151353.6522-1-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
 <DB7PR04MB4620E3087C59A26B865DEE988B790@DB7PR04MB4620.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHQ1cqH5hstMwbO1vqOkZ3GVe-j5a+c3TX-yosq-TvuFFxPkHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <VI1PR0402MB34851C1681F8A18341A8971098760@VI1PR0402MB3485.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHQ1cqFPmJ7AR3ftTyCy4DiE0YQgspPBnp+EQLPOwxXo6tTcYg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHQ1cqFPmJ7AR3ftTyCy4DiE0YQgspPBnp+EQLPOwxXo6tTcYg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 16 Nov 2019 22:15:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHQ1cqE2PGKUPfc8SUAw2TkuDXRbFtnyux=bWyOny21KK8dhjA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] CAAM JR lifecycle
To:     Horia Geanta <horia.geanta@nxp.com>
Cc:     Vakul Garg <vakul.garg@nxp.com>,
        "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
        Chris Healy <cphealy@gmail.com>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        Iuliana Prodan <iuliana.prodan@nxp.com>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 11:25 AM Andrey Smirnov
<andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 10:57 AM Horia Geanta <horia.geanta@nxp.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/6/2019 5:19 PM, Andrey Smirnov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:27 PM Vakul Garg <vakul.garg@nxp.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org <linux-crypto-
> > >>> owner@vger.kernel.org> On Behalf Of Andrey Smirnov
> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:44 PM
> > >>> To: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
> > >>> Cc: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>; Chris Healy
> > >>> <cphealy@gmail.com>; Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>; Horia Geanta
> > >>> <horia.geanta@nxp.com>; Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>;
> > >>> Iuliana Prodan <iuliana.prodan@nxp.com>; dl-linux-imx <linux-
> > >>> imx@nxp.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > >>> Subject: [PATCH 0/5] CAAM JR lifecycle
> > >>>
> > >>> Everyone:
> > >>>
> > >>> This series is a different approach to addressing the issues brought up in
> > >>> [discussion]. This time the proposition is to get away from creating per-JR
> > >>> platfrom device, move all of the underlying code into caam.ko and disable
> > >>> manual binding/unbinding of the CAAM device via sysfs. Note that this series
> > >>> is a rough cut intented to gauge if this approach could be acceptable for
> > >>> upstreaming.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Andrey Smirnov
> > >>>
> > >>> [discussion] lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190904023515.7107-13-
> > >>> andrew.smirnov@gmail.com
> > >>>
> > >>> Andrey Smirnov (5):
> > >>>   crypto: caam - use static initialization
> > >>>   crypto: caam - introduce caam_jr_cbk
> > >>>   crypto: caam - convert JR API to use struct caam_drv_private_jr
> > >>>   crypto: caam - do not create a platform devices for JRs
> > >>>   crypto: caam - disable CAAM's bind/unbind attributes
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> To access caam jobrings from DPDK (user space drivers), we unbind job-ring's platform device from the kernel.
> > >> What would be the alternate way to enable job ring drivers in user space?
> > >>
> > >
> > > Wouldn't either building your kernel with
> > > CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_FSL_CAAM_JR=n (this series doesn't handle that right
> > > currently due to being a rough cut) or disabling specific/all JRs via
> > > DT accomplish the same goal?
> > >
> > It's not a 1:1 match, the ability to move a ring to user space / VM etc.
> > *dynamically* goes away.
> >
>
> Wouldn't it be possible to do that dynamically using DT overlays? That
> is "modprobe -r caam; <apply overlay>; modprobe caam"?
>

Or, alternatively, could adding a module parameter, say "jr_mask", to
limit JRs controlled by the driver cover dynamic use case?

Thanks,
Andrey Smirnov