From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] xen/arm: Implement hip04-d01 platform Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:42:54 +0000 Message-ID: <1421160174.19103.93.camel@citrix.com> References: <1415009522-6344-1-git-send-email-frediano.ziglio@huawei.com> <1415009522-6344-2-git-send-email-frediano.ziglio@huawei.com> <1421150283.19103.39.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Frediano Ziglio Cc: zoltan.kiss@huawei.com, Julien Grall , Tim Deegan , xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Frediano Ziglio , Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, 2015-01-13 at 14:09 +0000, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > 2015-01-13 11:58 GMT+00:00 Ian Campbell : > > On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 10:11 +0000, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > >> Add this new platform to Xen. > >> This platform require specific code to initialize CPUs. > > > > What is the "bootwrapper"? Are you running this on real silicon or on an > > emulator? Can the platform be made to do PSCI instead? > > > > Very real. It's actually on my desk and I'm not in Matrix :-) OK. The choice of bootwrapper as a name is a bit unfortunate, since it is already used for something else, but oh well. > Has no PSCI support. Would be honestly very great. As we (as company) > write the firmware could be technically doable. There is no plan. This > piece of software is meant to bring the CPU from Secure mode to > Unsecure Hypervisor mode before calling kernel/hypervisor code and > provide supervisor calls. Sounds a lot like PSCI to me, except non-standard ;-) > >> + np_fab = dt_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "hisilicon,hip04-fabric"); > > > > Please add a reference to the DT bindings document for these values. > > > > linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/hisilicon/hisilicon.txt > > seems related but doesn't talk about most of these fields. > > > > There are documentation in the Linaro kernel, see > https://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-tracking.git/blob/HEAD:/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/hisilicon/hisilicon.txt. > I hope it will be merged soon. Thanks, but this doesn't seem to cover many of the properties used by the code you are adding, e.g. bootwrapper-{size,magic}, relocation-{entry,size} (in fact it suggests they are part of a boot-method array). I get the feeling these might be legacy/deprecated. Perhaps we could get away without supporting such things? Ian.