On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:48:55 +, Sam Day wrote:
> Most MSM8916 devices shipped without PSCI support. The history is quite
> nuanced (a good overview can be found in [1]), but the end result is
> that the upstream DTs for this SoC pretend that PSCI exists, and it's
> expected that the bootloade
Hello Mark,
On Monday, 27 January 2025 at 17:36, Mark Kettenis
wrote:
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:48:55 +
>
> > From: Sam Day m...@samcday.com
>
>
> Hi Sam,
>
> > Most MSM8916 devices shipped without PSCI support. The history is quite
> > nuanced (a good overview can be found in
Hi Mark,
On Monday, 27 January 2025 at 17:51, Sam Day wrote:
>
>
> Hello Mark,
>
> On Monday, 27 January 2025 at 17:36, Mark Kettenis mark.kette...@xs4all.nl
> wrote:
>
> > > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:48:55 +
> >
> > > From: Sam Day m...@samcday.com
> >
> > Hi Sam,
> >
> > > Most MSM
> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:48:55 +
> From: Sam Day
Hi Sam,
> Most MSM8916 devices shipped without PSCI support. The history is quite
> nuanced (a good overview can be found in [1]), but the end result is
> that the upstream DTs for this SoC pretend that PSCI exists, and it's
> expected that
Most MSM8916 devices shipped without PSCI support. The history is quite
nuanced (a good overview can be found in [1]), but the end result is
that the upstream DTs for this SoC pretend that PSCI exists, and it's
expected that the bootloader handles the case where it doesn't. This is
codified by the
5 matches
Mail list logo