From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from esa1.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com (esa1.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com [207.54.90.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3376D37A843 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 02:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=207.54.90.47 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790736061; cv=none; b=eF4r5almgkOt6omOeYpRrGRIh0G/a7VCVSRoSmBm4Cfc7VMbCp5+lGguoVnXrKGRtcpyFEKn5Cf0DGPUn5YVaH1T8UrLbajS84Gv2dPZD6Dj2uagnpM7R0YnPa30mKLoqJlffOzpqstlpuVqYHARaMOA13ZyYN/uASnud1yxc7A= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790736061; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rpumM33xCGo2iOKTxGmSwYJt7A4M/e0v6a/QhZC+xPw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=k4taUxnAHMDndIyBZ+sKYqPYQu2QKU0AnstavbFnL6LUs79AsFWwEGvwh0SYJoOkBZx1jq+gZ0eSoOZQzkg9BbPewboRnhE9KTmqzp14DZJDBCGdmzUbzHstFKXy4PoCUUSHbwTy7XjyP07Sytb79RqiXXIBCEdoLoyMNQiYXUY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=fujitsu.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fujitsu.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fujitsu.com header.i=@fujitsu.com header.b=QbCiQV0+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=207.54.90.47 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=fujitsu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fujitsu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fujitsu.com header.i=@fujitsu.com header.b="QbCiQV0+" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=fujitsu.com; i=@fujitsu.com; q=dns/txt; s=fj2; t=1790736058; x=1822272058; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=rpumM33xCGo2iOKTxGmSwYJt7A4M/e0v6a/QhZC+xPw=; b=QbCiQV0+6SeSm7ldakxObAQjgv1+FkNNYCJ9jNHU9RM8LuqiW8VqUdYn Mx2TR8tyPDOsxw9Ubkvee1fJ/2sBvOHYz9WPcDFFF7/bgz8JeVn5/yvKx k/jZdP6REkU1KZpGkFOcIQWGn/ewU8bGn3ccGCZ5UTDpDVp/gmRDjhS8C lYw/Vmk7pqDOHi0EvHvc3fNmplDj0odLp5rynvZ3X5CPtadX2ClC9TXxR xNwIURPDTClJ5gQl8+x5d68K744vRrH0WqFPNzzOMUcoZbSoSNOsBYvVE fZdcBR5Xlm/EsvGQlNz2Gm0F++uVj1uxfx7THzFqjYZTWeWK5HFQ5PSke Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 7ozTMKhPSAmEujwSYTxegw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: qIR/J3mkQiG2EPsnMI7vxA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11920"; a="256606517" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.27,130,1786978800"; d="scan'208";a="256606517" Received: from gmgwnl01.global.fujitsu.com (HELO mgmgwnl01.global.fujitsu.com) ([52.143.17.124]) by esa1.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Sep 2026 11:39:44 +0900 Received: from az2nlsmgm1.o.css.fujitsu.com (unknown [10.150.26.203]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mgmgwnl01.global.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF9A5ADAC for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 02:39:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from az2nlsmom2.o.css.fujitsu.com (unknown [10.150.26.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by az2nlsmgm1.o.css.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90EBEC0128E for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 02:39:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from FCCLS0092175.localdomain (unknown [10.8.20.173]) by az2nlsmom2.o.css.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 643BA1800139; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 02:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 11:39:36 +0900 From: Kohei Enju To: Yeoreum Yun Cc: 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=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260929-arm_cca_mr-v2-2-1d98bba187fd@arm.com> 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? Thanks, Kohei > + > /* > * Read configuration for the current Realm. > * > > -- > 2.43.0 >