From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA0823AFCFA for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 05:10:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790745056; cv=none; b=tPFzq9dExpHyRDCgAYL0SQqrkdxogo/yNcOYxwGlUlWim9x/852cE51CE4YsaYs5GbDTlu/UFkzMV4JgxSaEOKqdu4U3OUSiJO+ACw3bayM/NmORnjDjd75/KKZMsIewRpspmpfKPoAeqEGtaUxrmBRecStn8i5YMafG4G8QglA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790745056; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XNgz6d/OZjziPvSkUOUSXbumTXkkojRGtXQXxfoLR5o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PtCD535/yOlct6gjZJGAEKqYYO4Xdzn+MiGerhjMI4K2CTzzBW8BQOTlR9QhcnPTJMNuObkghKhZHWP+PMtM/kb+Kf+RfyUuTr0/3UFgUPl/k72E7UU2JpeWaq+X/Es7aZwGzwDT+32Dj0TkOtbqwDbonmXgp7QWQhAK86DGKa4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=Qj3iOJpB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="Qj3iOJpB" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 963E71477; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 22:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e129823.arm.com (e129823.arm.com [10.2.213.3]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 98D6F3F763; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 22:10:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1790745050; bh=XNgz6d/OZjziPvSkUOUSXbumTXkkojRGtXQXxfoLR5o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Qj3iOJpBJSgE1UgTtkfspHIrPqJXBq3eMgxYVBo8phSDlGxBx08q9zHfcQem6c5o/ CymR7GfymTQKKLxSO7tbMnMliPVLUpoTN6HoOSdA0DkzggSf3AuxzXu80fr9ERid8e dHyKwn9FOUbhHKUQrFpIlscNlyN828VqueuMANWI= Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 06:10:46 +0100 From: Yeoreum Yun To: Kohei Enju Cc: Yeoreum Yun , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Jason Gunthorpe , Suzuki Poulose , Steven Price , Sami Mujawar , thuth@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: rsi: Add realm hash algorithm defines Message-ID: References: <20260929-arm_cca_mr-v2-0-1d98bba187fd@arm.com> <20260929-arm_cca_mr-v2-2-1d98bba187fd@arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Sep 30, 2026 at 11:39:36AM +0900, Kohei Enju wrote: > On 09/29 17:57, Yeoreum Yun wrote: > > From: Sami Mujawar > > > > Add macro definitions for the hash algorithm identifiers, as > > specified in the Realm Management Monitor (RMM) specification. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sami Mujawar > > --- > > include/linux/arm-smccc-rsi.h | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/arm-smccc-rsi.h b/include/linux/arm-smccc-rsi.h > > index fddb77986f70..a83df2655808 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/arm-smccc-rsi.h > > +++ b/include/linux/arm-smccc-rsi.h > > @@ -144,6 +144,13 @@ struct realm_config { > > > > #endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */ > > > > +/* > > + * The RSI definition of the Hash Algorithm (as specified by the Secure > > + * Hash Standard) returned in the realm_config data structure. > > + */ > > +#define RSI_HASH_SHA_256 0 > > +#define RSI_HASH_SHA_512 1 > > Is it intentional to omit RSI_HASH_SHA_384 here? I realize it might not > be implemented in RMM yet, but would it be worth adding the constant now > for future support? Acked. Thanks! [...] -- Sincerely, Yeoreum Yun