Nouveau - Nov 2025 - [PATCH 02/11] gpu: nova-core: add ImemNs section infrastructure

On Wed, 2025-11-19 at 15:34 -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> A struct could be another option? You have 2 entities here, the location of
the
> memory (instruction memory or data memory) and the secure aspect.
> 
> struct FalconMem {
> ?? type: FalconMemType,? // enum which can be instruction or data
> ?? security: FalconMemSecurity, // enum can be secure or insecure.
> }
> 
> That documents everything. But it is just an option I am putting out to
consider
> if it helps.
Sure, but the security only applies to Imem, not Dmem.  I didn't want to
come up with a design that
allowed for "Secure Dmem", like your FalconMem struct does. 
That's why I think it makes more sense
to have just two Imem types.

On 11/19/25 12:45 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-11-19 at 15:34 -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> A struct could be another option? You have 2 entities here, the
location of the
>> memory (instruction memory or data memory) and the secure aspect.
>>
>> struct FalconMem {
>> ?? type: FalconMemType,? // enum which can be instruction or data
>> ?? security: FalconMemSecurity, // enum can be secure or insecure.
>> }
>>
>> That documents everything. But it is just an option I am putting out to
consider
>> if it helps.
> 
> Sure, but the security only applies to Imem, not Dmem.  I didn't want
to come up with a design that
> allowed for "Secure Dmem", like your FalconMem struct does. 
That's why I think it makes more sense
> to have just two Imem types.  
> 
Have we come full circle, back to the original patch, but with slightly
longer names (please)? (Spell out Secure and NonSecure, rather than
typing Sec and Ns.)

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard