On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 06:55:30AM +0000, S.H. Xie wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 02:13:26PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 06:01:31PM +0800, shh....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > + cpus {
> > > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > > > +
> > > > + cpu0: cpu@0 {
> > > > + device_type = "cpu";
> > > > + compatible = "arm,cortex-a72";
> > > > + reg = <0x0>;
> > > > + clocks = <&clockgen 1 0>;
> > > > + next-level-cache = <&l2>;
> > > > + cpu-idle-states = <&CPU_PH20>;
> > > > + };
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > + };
> > > > +
> > > > + idle-states {
> > > > + entry-method = "arm,psci";
> > > > +
> > > > + CPU_PH20: cpu-ph20 {
> > > > + compatible = "arm,idle-state";
> > > > + idle-state-name = "PH20";
> > > > + arm,psci-suspend-param = <0x00010000>;
> > > > + entry-latency-us = <1000>;
> > > > + exit-latency-us = <1000>;
> > > > + min-residency-us = <3000>;
> > > > + };
> > > > + };
> > >
> > > There's no PSCI node in this file, and none from am included file, so
> > > this doesn't look right.
> >
> > Looking again, none of the cpu nodes has an enable-method property, and
> > subsequent patches don't seem to add that to any cpu node.
> >
> > Has this DT actually been tested?
> [S.H] The PSCI node and the enable-method property are added by U-boot.
> U-boot can determine if using PSCI. If U-boot enables PSCI, it will add these
> missed parts in the dts. If not, it will not add these missed parts,
> so kernel will not use PSCI.
>
> In other words, the dts does not enable PSCI by default.
> It's U-boot which adds the missed part if it determines to use PSCI.
Ok. Could you please place a comment in the dts to that effect?
Thanks,
Mark.
