On Fri, 29 Mar 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Fri, 29 Mar 2013, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > This way the > > priority order would be: > > > > - If mdesc->smp_init is non null then use that. > > > > - Otherwise, if PSCI is available then use that. > > > > - Otherwise use mdesc->smp. > > > > This way, if the PSCI default has to be overriden (like in the MCPM case > > because it needs to wrap PSCI itself, or to cover Rob's concern) then > > this can be achieved at run time on a per mdesc basis. > > Actually that's not a bad idea, it could make everybody happy. > What about the following, in this precise order: > > - if a xen hypervisor node is present on device tree, use PSCI; > - otherwise if mdesc->smp_init is non null then use it; > - otherwise if PSCI is available then use it; > - otherwise use mdesc->smp. > > It's the most practical solution to satisfy everybody's needs.
Regardless of my previous email suggesting a mdesc for xen, I still don't understand why you need this absolute priority for Xen. Isn't my original suggestion sufficient? The likely reason why mdesc->smp_init might be needed is to provide an extra encapsulation layer before actually using PSCI instead of using it directly. Why would you need to bypass that? Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
