Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 5 Mar 2015 10:19:04 -0800 | From | Olof Johansson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 11/21] ARM64 / ACPI: Get PSCI flags in FADT for PSCI init |
| |
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 04:39:51PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > From: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org> > > There are two flags: PSCI_COMPLIANT and PSCI_USE_HVC. When set, > the former signals to the OS that the firmware is PSCI compliant. > The latter selects the appropriate conduit for PSCI calls by > toggling between Hypervisor Calls (HVC) and Secure Monitor Calls > (SMC). > > FADT table contains such information in ACPI 5.1, FADT table was > parsed in ACPI table init and copy to struct acpi_gbl_FADT, so > use the flags in struct acpi_gbl_FADT for PSCI init. > > Since ACPI 5.1 doesn't support self defined PSCI function IDs, > which means that only PSCI 0.2+ is supported in ACPI. > > CC: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> > CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> > CC: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > Tested-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com> > Tested-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com> > Tested-by: Mark Langsdorf <mlangsdo@redhat.com> > Tested-by: Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com> > Tested-by: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org> > Tested-by: Robert Richter <rrichter@cavium.com> > Acked-by: Robert Richter <rrichter@cavium.com> > Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
However, a comment on the color of the bike shed below. I'm fine with this being addressed with an incremental patch instead of respun:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c > index e8c7000..97fa7f3 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c > @@ -390,10 +390,12 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p) > > early_ioremap_reset(); > > - if (acpi_disabled) > + if (acpi_disabled) { > unflatten_device_tree(); > - > - psci_init(); > + psci_dt_init(); > + } else { > + psci_acpi_init(); > + }
I would prefer having a common psci_init() in psci.c, which in turn calls either the dt or the acpi version, and after that calls the set_functions if the init function passed -- it'll keep more code common as new versions of PSCI is added.
It also keeps setup_arch() somewhat cleaner, and avoids bubbling up the dt-vs-acpi differences to the top level.
-Olof
| |