From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>,
Srinidhi Kasagar <srinidhi.kasagar@stericsson.com>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>,
David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: Resend [PATCH 00/10] ARM: SMP initialization consolidation
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 15:57:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201105031557.42355.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110502234012.GJ28001@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Tuesday 03 May 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Such a SoC may wish to do things differently from the current approach
> (which is basically bring up all cores at boot) particularly as the
> performance gained from each CPU is far from identical. So I've been
> nervous about moving the CPU map initialization into core code.
>
> Note that the low power CPU may not be the last in the set, so merely
> limiting the system to two CPUs is not the answer.
If I read the patches correctly, it's still strictly opt-in per platform.
When a platform wants to support the setup you mentioned or something
even stranger, all it would have to do is provide its own versions of
the SMP pen and scu init function, right?
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Resend [PATCH 00/10] ARM: SMP initialization consolidation
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 13:57:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201105031557.42355.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110502234012.GJ28001@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Tuesday 03 May 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Such a SoC may wish to do things differently from the current approach
> (which is basically bring up all cores at boot) particularly as the
> performance gained from each CPU is far from identical. So I've been
> nervous about moving the CPU map initialization into core code.
>
> Note that the low power CPU may not be the last in the set, so merely
> limiting the system to two CPUs is not the answer.
If I read the patches correctly, it's still strictly opt-in per platform.
When a platform wants to support the setup you mentioned or something
even stranger, all it would have to do is provide its own versions of
the SMP pen and scu init function, right?
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Resend [PATCH 00/10] ARM: SMP initialization consolidation
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 15:57:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201105031557.42355.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110502234012.GJ28001@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Tuesday 03 May 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Such a SoC may wish to do things differently from the current approach
> (which is basically bring up all cores at boot) particularly as the
> performance gained from each CPU is far from identical. So I've been
> nervous about moving the CPU map initialization into core code.
>
> Note that the low power CPU may not be the last in the set, so merely
> limiting the system to two CPUs is not the answer.
If I read the patches correctly, it's still strictly opt-in per platform.
When a platform wants to support the setup you mentioned or something
even stranger, all it would have to do is provide its own versions of
the SMP pen and scu init function, right?
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-03 13:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-30 2:08 Resend [PATCH 00/10] ARM: SMP initialization consolidation Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 01/10] ARM: move Versatile SMP pen code to common location Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 02/10] ARM: ux500: convert to use common secondary pen code Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 03/10] ARM: msm: " Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 04/10] ARM: add common scu_init_cpus Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 05/10] ARM: omap: use " Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 06/10] ARM: realview: " Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 07/10] ARM: vexpress: " Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 08/10] ARM: ux500: " Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 09/10] ARM: shmobile: " Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` [PATCH 10/10] ARM: move set_cpu_present calls to common smp code Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 2:08 ` Rob Herring
2011-04-30 5:58 ` Resend [PATCH 00/10] ARM: SMP initialization consolidation Stephen Boyd
2011-04-30 5:58 ` Stephen Boyd
2011-04-30 5:58 ` Stephen Boyd
2011-05-02 23:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-02 23:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-02 23:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-03 13:57 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2011-05-03 13:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-05-03 13:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-05-08 9:42 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-08 9:42 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-08 9:42 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-08 19:38 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-08 19:38 ` Rob Herring
2011-05-08 19:38 ` Rob Herring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201105031557.42355.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=davidb@codeaurora.org \
--cc=dwalker@fifo99.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@stericsson.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=srinidhi.kasagar@stericsson.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.