[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150415161759.GB1111@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 10:17:59 -0600
From: Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@...aro.org>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
Device Tree Mailing List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"arm@...nel.org" <arm@...nel.org>,
Abhimanyu Kapur <abhimany@...eaurora.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Add smp booting support for Qualcomm ARMv8 SoCs
On Tue, Apr 14 2015 at 16:32 -0600, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 03:21:17PM +0100, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> > Looking beyond this set of patches, I can foresee that you won't care
>> > about the generic arm64 cpuidle driver either, or more precisely the
>> > separation between cpuidle subsystem+driver and the SoC-specific
>> > back-end (cpu_operations).
>>
>> That's probably true for what I guess are a number of reasons. I'm guessing the arm64 cpuidle driver expects PSCI.
>
>Wrap lines sensibly please.
>
>The arm64 cpuidle driver, that is now arm generic cpuidle driver does
>not expect anything apart from an enable-method (and you pulled
>part of its back-end implementation for arm32 Qualcomm platforms, FYI).
>
The backend for this SoC would leverage the same platform code as ARM32.
The cpu_operations callbacks for init and suspend will call into the the
same platform functions used by arm32 QCOM SoCs.
Thanks,
Lina
>It took years to consolidate it and the main reason was the lack of
>standard interfaces for power down/up sequences that this patchset of
>yours wants to promote in arm64 world.
>
>The lack of standard power interfaces may not have been an issue for you,
>who cares about Qualcomm code, it has been a sore issue for people
>trying to generalize things across ARM platforms in the kernel, which is
>the only sensible way forward.
>
>PSCI is a standard interface (and Qualcomm are already contributing to
>it, for the records) that can certainly be extended, and you are welcome
>to contribute to it, but certainly not ignored.
>
>Thanks,
>Lorenzo
>--
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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