[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1303271321290.1372@syhkavp.arg>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 13:24:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
cc: Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] [RFC] arm: use PSCI if available
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On 03/27/2013 11:23 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Would you agree on a patch that moves virt_smp_ops out of mach-virt and
> > > renames them to psci_smp_ops (maybe to arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp_ops.c)?
> > >
> > > Would you agree on initializing psci from setup_arch, right after the
> > > call to arm_dt_init_cpu_maps()?
> > >
> > > Finally the most controversial point: would you agree on using
> > > psci_smp_ops by default if they are available?
> > > If not, would you at least agree on letting Xen overwrite the default
> > > machine smp_ops?
> > > We need one or the other for dom0 support.
> >
> > It should not be *always* use PSCI smp ops if available, but use them
> > only if the platform does not define its own smp ops.
>
> Well, that is the one additional problem that we have on Xen.
>
> On x86 Xen replaces a lot of core native function calls with its own
> implementations (see paravirt_ops).
> On ARM we only need *one* set of calls: the smp_ops calls.
>
> So if we don't want to give priority to PSCI over the platform smp_ops,
> then we need a simple workaround just for Xen in common code like the
> one appended below.
> Not pretty, but at least small:
[...]
What about the patch below that I'm carying in my MCPM branch
which has been posted here already:
From: Jon Medhurst <tixy@...aro.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:23:13 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: Enable selection of SMP operations at boot time
Add a new 'smp_init' hook to machine_desc so platforms can specify a
function to be used to setup smp ops instead of having a statically
defined value.
Signed-off-by: Jon Medhurst <tixy@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
Reviewed-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
index 308ad7d6f9..c01bf53b85 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
@@ -16,8 +16,10 @@ struct pt_regs;
struct smp_operations;
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
#define smp_ops(ops) (&(ops))
+#define smp_init_ops(ops) (&(ops))
#else
#define smp_ops(ops) (struct smp_operations *)NULL
+#define smp_init_ops(ops) (void (*)(void))NULL
#endif
struct machine_desc {
@@ -41,6 +43,7 @@ struct machine_desc {
unsigned char reserve_lp2 :1; /* never has lp2 */
char restart_mode; /* default restart mode */
struct smp_operations *smp; /* SMP operations */
+ void (*smp_init)(void);
void (*fixup)(struct tag *, char **,
struct meminfo *);
void (*reserve)(void);/* reserve mem blocks */
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
index 3f6cbb2e3e..41edca8582 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
@@ -768,7 +768,10 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
arm_dt_init_cpu_maps();
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
if (is_smp()) {
- smp_set_ops(mdesc->smp);
+ if(mdesc->smp_init)
+ (*mdesc->smp_init)();
+ else
+ smp_set_ops(mdesc->smp);
smp_init_cpus();
}
#endif
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists