Re: [PATCH 3/9] firmware: imx: ele: Add API functions for OCOTP fuse access

[Frank Li]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 08:54:35AM +0200, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
> On 16.06.26 22:05, Frank Li wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 07:59:54PM +0200, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
> >> On 16.06.26 17:36, Frank Li wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 01:52:18PM +0200, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
> >>>> From: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> The ELE S400 API provides read and write access to the OCOTP fuse
> >>>> registers. This adds the necessary API functions imx_se_read_fuse()
> >>>> and imx_se_write_fuse() to be used by other drivers such as the
> >>>> OCOTP S400 NVMEM driver.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is ported from the downstream vendor kernel.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  drivers/firmware/imx/ele_base_msg.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>  drivers/firmware/imx/ele_base_msg.h |   6 ++
> >>>>  include/linux/firmware/imx/se_api.h |   3 +
> >>>>  3 files changed, 131 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>> ...
> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/firmware/imx/se_api.h
> >>>> @@ -11,4 +11,7 @@
> >>>>  #define SOC_ID_OF_IMX8ULP		0x084d
> >>>>  #define SOC_ID_OF_IMX93			0x9300
> >>>>
> >>>> +int imx_se_read_fuse(void *se_if_data, uint16_t fuse_id, u32 *value);
> >>>> +int imx_se_write_fuse(void *se_if_data, uint16_t fuse_id, u32 value);
> >>>> +
> >>>
> >>> This API should implement in fuse drivers. Other consume should use standard
> >>> fuse API to get value. If put here, it may bypass fuse driver.
> >>
> >> The reason this is here, is the downstream implementation in linux-imx
> >> and the current code organization.
> >
> > Downstream may not good enough, sometime, it is quick solution.
>
> Ok, but the code structure and API design has been upstreamed like this
> and the refactoring could have been done before, if downstream is known
> to not be well organized.
>
> >
> >> I thought there is some good reason
> >> to have shared functions and it looks like Pankaj structured it like
> >> this so all API functions live in ele_base_msg.c and the internal
> >> structs and defines in ele_base_msg.h and se_ctrl.h are not exposed to
> >> other drivers.
> >>
> >> If I would move this into imx-ocotp-ele.c, then I would also need to
> >> change how the code is organized and make the internal se_api functions
> >> exposed to other drivers. I don't know if that is really a good idea.
> >>
> >> I get your point but it looks like this contradicts the intention of
> >> having a clean API in the firmware driver.
> >
> > You can refer imx-ocotp-scu.c, structure should be similar, only difference
> > is that lower transfer APIs.
> Ok, this would mean that I expose the generic SE functions and structs
> required for fuse handling. In practice, I would remove
> imx_se_read_fuse() and imx_se_write_fuse() from se_api.h and instead add
> the following:
>
> struct se_msg_hdr { ... };
> struct se_api_msg { ... };
> struct se_if_priv;
> se_fill_cmd_msg_hdr( ... );
> se_msg_send_rcv( ... );
> se_val_rsp_hdr_n_status( ... );
>
> Then I would export the functions in ele_common.c and put the fuse
> read/write functions in the NVMEM driver.
>
> Is that what you want me to do?

Yes, Idealy, it should be children device under ele, ELE like a bus, which
previous lower level data transfer, ocotp should be base on top then it.
like spi/i2c, which provide low level data transfer.

Frank

>
> Pankaj (and maybe Peng), do you have any comments on this?
>
> Thanks!