On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 03:05:38PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 19/01/2021 14:58, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:10:45PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> A subsequent change is going to introduce SKINIT support, wherein the APs
> >> will
> >> be already be in the wait-fo
On 19/01/2021 14:58, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:10:45PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> A subsequent change is going to introduce SKINIT support, wherein the APs
>> will
>> be already be in the wait-for-SIPI state, and an INIT must not be sent.
>>
>> Introduce a send_INIT b
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:10:45PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> A subsequent change is going to introduce SKINIT support, wherein the APs will
> be already be in the wait-for-SIPI state, and an INIT must not be sent.
>
> Introduce a send_INIT boolean, so we can control sending an INIT IPI
> separ
A subsequent change is going to introduce SKINIT support, wherein the APs will
be already be in the wait-for-SIPI state, and an INIT must not be sent.
Introduce a send_INIT boolean, so we can control sending an INIT IPI
separately from sending SIPIs.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Andrew C