<snip>
> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >v14: > > >> > > >Resent for retesting (because of suspected false negative). > > >> > > > > > >> > > >Series Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com> Series > > >> > > >Tested- > > >by: > > >> > > >Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com> Series Tested-by: Dharmik > > >Thakkar > > >> > > ><dharmik.thak...@arm.com> Series Tested-by: Vimal Chungath > > >> > > ><vcchu...@amazon.com> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Series Tested-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavat...@marvell.com> > > >> > > > > >> > > Also, I believe we need to take a look at ARCH_SOC_ID support > > >coming > > >> > > up in > > >> > > 5.9 kernel. > > >> > > > > >> > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F > > >> > > %2 > > >> > > Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps- > > &data=04%7C > > >> > > > > > 01%7Chemant.agrawal%40nxp.com%7Cf05a2623ec9347bd254708d8c2d4896 > > c% > > >> > > > > 7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637473565383043785 > > %7 > > >> > > > > > CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJ > B > > Ti > > >> > > > > > I6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=o7%2BXNileFgI2By08IHv > > EY > > >> > > PWrDjRikXlfFtal1MCdyCM%3D&reserved=0 > > >3A__lore.kernel.org_linux-2Darm-2Dkernel_20200506164411.3284- > > >2D1- > > >2D&d=DwIGaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=1cjuAHrGh745jHNmj > > >2fD85sUMIJ2IPIDsIJzo6FN6Z0&m=A7kOn5DYMe_WZiykt8BVATgv7- > > >qTVhfo4iSgHBg- > > >BTo&s=dslFI0W1qZdDxkbXDMTzPSUzlKMFfMUsE6tllPaF9Oc&e= > > >> > > sudeep.ho...@arm.com/ > > >> > > > >> > Agree, it can come after this series is merged. > > >> > > > >> > Note that it requires firmware with SMCCC v1.2 support in the > > >> > underlying platform. > > >> > > > >> > > >> I have a few questions to everyone: > > >> Is there any comprehensive documentation about how to use this? > > >Things > > >> like where in Linux can I get the ARCH_SOC_ID and how are the ID's > > >mapped > > >> to socs? > > >Kernel patch is at [1] - merged in Kernel 5.9 Makes use of SMCCC > > >v1.2, SMCCC_ARCH_SOC_ID call. > > >SMCCC v1.2 spec is at [2]. > > > > > >The SoC ID becomes available at: > > >/sys/devices/socX/family > > >/sys/devices/socX/soc_id > > >/sys/devices/socX/revision > > > > > >SOC_ID makes use of JEP-106 code [3] for the SiP which makes it unique. > > > > > >[1] > > >https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furl > > >d > > e > > >fense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps- > > &data=04%7C01%7Chemant. > > > >agrawal%40nxp.com%7Cf05a2623ec9347bd254708d8c2d4896c%7C686ea1d > > 3bc2b4c6f > > >a92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637473565383043785%7CUnknown%7CT > > WFpbGZsb3d8e > > > >yJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3 > > D%7C100 > > > >0&sdata=o7%2BXNileFgI2By08IHvEYPWrDjRikXlfFtal1MCdyCM%3D&a > > mp;reserv > > >ed=0 > 3A__lkml.org_lkml_2020_6_25_208&d=DwIGaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOy > > >Paz7xtfQ&r=1cjuAHrGh745jHNmj2fD85sUMIJ2IPIDsIJzo6FN6Z0&m=A7k > > >On5DYMe_WZiykt8BVATgv7-qTVhfo4iSgHBg- > > >BTo&s=5xXdzD7DpbcDeG81JVGZf396EFNbV0rSl00hRLuZJBc&e= > > >[2] > > >https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furl > > >d > > e > > >fense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps- > > &data=04%7C01%7Chemant. > > > >agrawal%40nxp.com%7Cf05a2623ec9347bd254708d8c2d4896c%7C686ea1d > > 3bc2b4c6f > > >a92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637473565383043785%7CUnknown%7CT > > WFpbGZsb3d8e > > > >yJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3 > > D%7C100 > > > >0&sdata=o7%2BXNileFgI2By08IHvEYPWrDjRikXlfFtal1MCdyCM%3D&a > > mp;reserv > > >ed=0 > > 3A__developer.arm.com_documentation_den0028_c&d=DwIGaQ&c=n > > >KjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=1cjuAHrGh745jHNmj2fD85sUMIJ2IPIDsIJz > > >o6FN6Z0&m=A7kOn5DYMe_WZiykt8BVATgv7-qTVhfo4iSgHBg- > > >BTo&s=DFG7a9oFDFczCcODfR0wVGjkLQXwMU19q_ogaFVw90I&e= > > >[3] > > >https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furl > > >d > > e > > >fense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps- > > &data=04%7C01%7Chemant. > > > >agrawal%40nxp.com%7Cf05a2623ec9347bd254708d8c2d4896c%7C686ea1d > > 3bc2b4c6f > > >a92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637473565383043785%7CUnknown%7CT > > WFpbGZsb3d8e > > > >yJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3 > > D%7C100 > > > >0&sdata=o7%2BXNileFgI2By08IHvEYPWrDjRikXlfFtal1MCdyCM%3D&a > > mp;reserv > > >ed=0 > > >3A__developer.arm.com_documentation_ka001301_1- > > >2D0&d=DwIGaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=1cjuAHrGh745jHNm > > >j2fD85sUMIJ2IPIDsIJzo6FN6Z0&m=A7kOn5DYMe_WZiykt8BVATgv7- > > >qTVhfo4iSgHBg- > > >BTo&s=GQsJJuft9k1iooO8VNNIM8ZUUgGjCEPB6eRxN3qm62U&e= > > > > > >> If the ID mappings are not public then the plaform owners would > > >> need > > >to > > >> add the support, right? > > >I agree here. There are firmware changes required and we do not know > > >the IDs as well. It will be good for Marvell/NXP/NVIDIA to do this. > > >Pavan, is this ok for you? > > > > Yeah, I believe we need fallback to the current mechanisms if SOC_ID > > support is not present or platform owners have not updated them. > > [Hemant] +1 > Agree. Just to be clear, my ask is, can any of you take this work as Arm will not have all the parts to test this?
