Re: [PATCH v4] arm64: defconfig: Enable QCOMTEE module for QTEE-enabled Qualcomm SoCs

On 16/02/2026 11:36, Harshal Dev wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2/16/2026 10:48 AM, Kuldeep Singh wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/13/2026 3:56 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 13/02/2026 11:24, Kuldeep Singh wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/14/2026 1:49 PM, Harshal Dev via OP-TEE wrote:
>>>>> All Qualcomm SoCs starting from SM8650 provide access to the Qualcomm
>>>>> Trusted Execution Environment (QTEE) through the SMCInvoke interface,
>>>>> implemented by the QCOMTEE driver. QTEE runs in the Secure World domain
>>>>> on ARM64 CPUs and exposes secure services to Linux running in the Normal
>>>>> World domain.
>>>>>
>>>>> This change enables the QCOMTEE driver as a module to support
>>>>> communication with QTEE.
>>>>>
>>>>> QCOMTEE has been tested on a Qualcomm RB3Gen2 board by loading and
>>>>> executing a Trusted Application via tests hosted at
>>>>> github.com/qualcomm/minkipc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Harshal Dev <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> Tested on rb3gen2 device and able to see driver load successfully.
>>>
>>> What exactly did you test? That a module can be built?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> root@qcom-armv8a:~# lsmod | grep qcomtee
>>>> qcomtee                32768  0
>>>
>>> Sorry, but that's basic of kbuild and module system.
>>
>> Yes, did a basic testing only.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> root@qcom-armv8a:~# rmmod qcomtee
>>>> root@qcom-armv8a:~# insmod
>>>
>>> Not a defconfig testing.
>>>
>>>> /lib/modules/6.18.0-next-20251202-00002-ga8c3ce157925
>>>> -dirty/kernel/drivers/tee/qcomtee/qcomtee.ko
>>>> [  164.464598] qcomtee: QTEE version 5.2.0
>>>> root@qcom-armv8a:~# ls /dev/tee0
>>>> /dev/tee0
>>>> root@qcom-armv8a:~#
>>>>
>>>> With that,
>>>> Reviewed-by: Kuldeep Singh <[email protected]>
>>>> Tested-by: Kuldeep Singh <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> You cannot test a defconfig.
>>
>> Sure, we can drop tested-by tag.
>> Maybe patch author once send next rev can just add Reviewed-by tag only.
>> Hope this is fine.
>>
> 
> I am fine with us dropping this Tested-by tag. I thought it made sense to test that
> the driver being built as a module is removed without encountering any issues.

We do not talk about this. No one claimed that this test is good or not.
Read again discussion - there was no test of this defconfig change. It
did not happen as it cannot happen or is completely pointless. The tag
applies to THE COMMIT not to something else. I explained this way too
many times.

> I will not send another patch revision just to collect/drop tags.
> 
> Thanks,
> Harshal


Best regards,
Krzysztof