Hi York, > -----Original Message----- > From: Zhiqiang Hou > Sent: 2016年6月12日 12:31 > To: york sun <york....@nxp.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de; > albert.u.b...@aribaud.net; scottw...@freescale.com; > mingkai...@freescale.com; york...@freescale.com; le...@freescale.com; > prabha...@freescale.com; bhupesh.sha...@freescale.com > Subject: RE: [PATCHV5 4/6] ARMv8/Layerscape: switch SMP method accordingly > > Hi York, > > Thanks for your comments! > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: york sun > > Sent: 2016年6月12日 12:07 > > To: Zhiqiang Hou <zhiqiang....@nxp.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de; > > albert.u.b...@aribaud.net; scottw...@freescale.com; > > mingkai...@freescale.com; york...@freescale.com; le...@freescale.com; > > prabha...@freescale.com; bhupesh.sha...@freescale.com > > Subject: Re: [PATCHV5 4/6] ARMv8/Layerscape: switch SMP method > > accordingly > > > > On 06/11/2016 08:58 PM, Zhiqiang Hou wrote: > > > Hi York, > > > > > > Thanks for your comments! > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: York Sun [mailto:york....@nxp.com] > > >> Sent: 2016年6月8日 8:56 > > >> To: Zhiqiang Hou <zhiqiang....@nxp.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de; > > >> albert.u.b...@aribaud.net; scottw...@freescale.com; > > >> mingkai...@freescale.com; york...@freescale.com; > > >> le...@freescale.com; prabha...@freescale.com; > > >> bhupesh.sha...@freescale.com > > >> Subject: Re: [PATCHV5 4/6] ARMv8/Layerscape: switch SMP method > > >> accordingly > > >> > > >> On 06/04/2016 11:40 PM, Zhiqiang Hou wrote: > > >>> From: Hou Zhiqiang <zhiqiang....@nxp.com> > > >>> > > >>> If the PSCI and PPA is ready, skip the fixup for spin-table and > > >>> waking secondary cores. If not, change SMP method to spin-table, > > >>> and the device node of PSCI will be removed. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Hou Zhiqiang <zhiqiang....@nxp.com> > > >>> --- > > >>> V5: > > >>> - Changed the checking if the PSCI feature is ready to read the psci > > >>> version. > > >>> > > >>> V4: > > >>> - Reordered this patch. > > >>> > > >>> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/cpu.c | 17 +++++++++++++--- > > >>> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c | 36 > > >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >>> 2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > >>> > > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/cpu.c > > >>> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/cpu.c > > >>> index 672a453..eb566cd 100644 > > >>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/cpu.c > > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/cpu.c > > >>> @@ -23,6 +23,9 @@ > > >>> #ifdef CONFIG_FSL_ESDHC > > >>> #include <fsl_esdhc.h> > > >>> #endif > > >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARMV8_SEC_FIRMWARE_SUPPORT #include > > >>> +<asm/armv8/sec_firmware.h> #endif > > >>> > > >>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > > >>> > > >>> @@ -618,6 +621,7 @@ int arch_early_init_r(void) { #ifdef CONFIG_MP > > >>> int rv = 1; > > >>> + bool psci_support = false; > > >>> #endif > > >>> > > >>> #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FSL_ERRATUM_A009635 @@ -625,9 +629,16 @@ int > > >>> arch_early_init_r(void) #endif > > >>> > > >>> #ifdef CONFIG_MP > > >>> - rv = fsl_layerscape_wake_seconday_cores(); > > >>> - if (rv) > > >>> - printf("Did not wake secondary cores\n"); > > >>> +#if defined(CONFIG_ARMV8_SEC_FIRMWARE_SUPPORT) && > > >> defined(CONFIG_ARMV8_PSCI) > > >>> + /* Check the psci version to determine if the psci is supported > > >>> */ > > >>> + psci_support = (int)sec_firmware_support_psci_version() > 0 ? > > >>> + true : false; > > >> > > >> Another comment, even if the function can be used to indicate if > > >> psci is available, do you have to cast it to (int)? I think this can be > > >> simplified as > > >> psci_support = sec_firmware_support_psci_version() > 0; > > > > > > The type of this func return value is 'unsigned int', so the cast is > > > necessary. > > > > The return value of function sec_firmware_support_psci_version() may > > need some work. It has three results > > > > Positive numbers mean success (presuming bit 31 is not used by major number. > > Need to check with PPA code) Zero means image is not valid Negative > > numbers means errors > > In PSCI spec v1.0, the bit 31 is used by major number, and the type of the > return > value is uint, but there isn't any other description for the return value. I > don't know > why the PPA isn't consistent with PSCI spec.
I misunderstand your words, and the PPA is consistent with PSCI spec. Will take your suggestion that presuming bit 31 isn't used by major number to handle the return value. > > If the error code doesn't include -EINVAL, you can return -EINVAL in > > case of an invalid image. Then you can have > > sec_firmware_support_psci_version() return int. > > Thanks, Zhiqiang _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
