Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] firmware: arm_ffa: check pkvm initailised when initailise ffa driver

Yeoreum Yun <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-integrity,dev.linux.lists.kvmarm,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-security-module
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Will,

> On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 02:32:23PM +0100, Yeoreum Yun wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 07:57:43AM +0100, Yeoreum Yun wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, the FF-A initialization is not driven by a device probe, but rather
> > > > > happens as part of the bus registration itself,
> > > > > so it does not fit well with a device_link or probe deferral based approach.
> > > > >
> > > > > Instead, perhaps we could go with the idea I mentioned previously:
> > > > > either introduce a notifier, or create a pseudo ffa_device
> > > > > once pKVM initialization has completed, and
> > > > > then let the ffa driver perform the additional initialization from there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Am I missing something?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > In order to handle/cleanup some ugliness in interrupt management in the
> > > > FF-A driver, we may introduce DT node eventually. But it will take sometime.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, I think this DT node wouldn't be helpful to solve
> > > this situation for dependency with the kvm misc device...
> > >
> > > IMHO, current situation, the notifier seems to good option. unless
> > > we make the initcall to recongise this dependency.
> > >
> >
> > I think the best approach for now is to introduce a notifier to handle this situation.
> > If there are no further suggestions, I’ll send a v2 based on:
> >   - https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>
> I can't say that I'm a huge fan of that :/
>
> The notifier will literally fire once, for a single listener. That's
> called a function call.


I revisited Marc’s suggestion about using device links
(https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/)

but unless I’m misunderstanding something, I don’t think it would be a viable solution:
 - https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/#t

Also, calling functions defined by FF-A from KVM would introduce
an unnecessary module dependency between the KVM and FF-A drivers.

I’ve been trying to find an alternative approach,
but I’m not confident about what would be appropriate.

If you don’t mind, could you share your thoughts on this?

Thanks!

--
Sincerely,
Yeoreum Yun
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.