On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 21:43, Sudeep Holla sudeep.holla@arm.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 05:07:08PM +0100, Ludvig Pärsson wrote:
Currently there is no dependency between the "linaro,scmi-optee" driver and the tee_core. If the scmi-optee driver gets probed before the tee_bus_type is initialized, then we will get an unwanted error print.
This patch enables putting scmi-optee nodes as children to the optee node in devicetree, which indirectly creates the missing dependency.
Signed-off-by: Ludvig Pärsson ludvig.parsson@axis.com
drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c b/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c index a1c1fa1a9c28..be6f02fd5a7f 100644 --- a/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c +++ b/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c @@ -1533,6 +1533,11 @@ static int optee_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) if (rc) goto err_disable_shm_cache;
/* Populate any dependent child node (if any) */rc = devm_of_platform_populate(&pdev->dev);if (rc)goto err_disable_shm_cache;While I agree with idea of populating dependent child nodes from here, I am not sure if it is OK to give error if that fails or to just continue as there may be other users(like the user-space) for the OPTEE in general.
This uncertainty is simply because the inter subsystem dependency issue can't be resolved by this. See my comment regarding FF-A ABI on the other thread [1]
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/11/14/29
-Sumit
-- Regards, Sudeep