From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] drivers: firmware: psci: unify enable-method binding on ARM {64,32}-bit systems
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:02:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160422150222.GO10606@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <571A3BCA.8060002@arm.com>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 03:57:14PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On 22/04/16 15:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 03:38:31PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >>Currently ARM CPUs DT bindings allows different enable-method value for
> >>PSCI based systems. On ARM 64-bit this property is required and must be
> >>"psci" while on ARM 32-bit systems this property is optional and must
> >>be "arm,psci".
> >
> >FWIW, "arm,psci" has always been the compatible string for the PSCI
> >node, and was never intended to be the enable-method. So as far as I can
> >tell, this was a mistake/bug, and not a deliberate attempt at specifying
> >32-bit differently.
>
> I agree.
>
> >>This is problematic if 32-bit OS is run on 64-bit system which has
> >>"psci" as enable-method rather than the expected "arm,psci".
> >>
> >>So let's unify the value into "psci" and remove support for "arm,psci"
> >>before it finds any users.
> >>
> >>Reported-by: Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew@arm.com>
> >>Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
> >>Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> >>Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> >>Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> >
> >This was definitely a mistake, as "arm,psci" was the compatible string
> >for the psci node, and was never the enable-method. So:
> >
> >Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>
> Thanks.
>
> >Hopefully no-one's begun to use this.
>
> Seems so. Even the 32-bit kernel doesn't make use of that.
>
> The first user was for idle(see below) which was added in v4.6 just to
> keep it in sync with binding. It would be good to get it fixed before
> the final v4.6
Indeed.
Lorenzo, how should we forward this on? Do we have any other urgent
fixes for v4.6, or should we ask arm-soc to take this alone?
Thanks,
Mark.
> >>diff --git a/drivers/firmware/psci.c b/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> >>index 11bfee8b79a9..b5d05807e6ec 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> >>@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static struct cpuidle_ops psci_cpuidle_ops __initdata = {
> >> .init = psci_dt_cpu_init_idle,
> >> };
> >>
> >>-CPUIDLE_METHOD_OF_DECLARE(psci, "arm,psci", &psci_cpuidle_ops);
> >>+CPUIDLE_METHOD_OF_DECLARE(psci, "psci", &psci_cpuidle_ops);
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>,
Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi
<lorenzo.pieralisi-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: firmware: psci: unify enable-method binding on ARM {64,32}-bit systems
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:02:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160422150222.GO10606@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <571A3BCA.8060002-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 03:57:14PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On 22/04/16 15:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 03:38:31PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >>Currently ARM CPUs DT bindings allows different enable-method value for
> >>PSCI based systems. On ARM 64-bit this property is required and must be
> >>"psci" while on ARM 32-bit systems this property is optional and must
> >>be "arm,psci".
> >
> >FWIW, "arm,psci" has always been the compatible string for the PSCI
> >node, and was never intended to be the enable-method. So as far as I can
> >tell, this was a mistake/bug, and not a deliberate attempt at specifying
> >32-bit differently.
>
> I agree.
>
> >>This is problematic if 32-bit OS is run on 64-bit system which has
> >>"psci" as enable-method rather than the expected "arm,psci".
> >>
> >>So let's unify the value into "psci" and remove support for "arm,psci"
> >>before it finds any users.
> >>
> >>Reported-by: Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
> >>Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
> >>Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
> >>Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
> >>Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
> >
> >This was definitely a mistake, as "arm,psci" was the compatible string
> >for the psci node, and was never the enable-method. So:
> >
> >Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
>
> Thanks.
>
> >Hopefully no-one's begun to use this.
>
> Seems so. Even the 32-bit kernel doesn't make use of that.
>
> The first user was for idle(see below) which was added in v4.6 just to
> keep it in sync with binding. It would be good to get it fixed before
> the final v4.6
Indeed.
Lorenzo, how should we forward this on? Do we have any other urgent
fixes for v4.6, or should we ask arm-soc to take this alone?
Thanks,
Mark.
> >>diff --git a/drivers/firmware/psci.c b/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> >>index 11bfee8b79a9..b5d05807e6ec 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> >>@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static struct cpuidle_ops psci_cpuidle_ops __initdata = {
> >> .init = psci_dt_cpu_init_idle,
> >> };
> >>
> >>-CPUIDLE_METHOD_OF_DECLARE(psci, "arm,psci", &psci_cpuidle_ops);
> >>+CPUIDLE_METHOD_OF_DECLARE(psci, "psci", &psci_cpuidle_ops);
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-22 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-22 14:38 [PATCH] drivers: firmware: psci: unify enable-method binding on ARM {64, 32}-bit systems Sudeep Holla
2016-04-22 14:38 ` [PATCH] drivers: firmware: psci: unify enable-method binding on ARM {64,32}-bit systems Sudeep Holla
2016-04-22 14:44 ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 14:44 ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 14:57 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-04-22 14:57 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-04-22 15:02 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2016-04-22 15:02 ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 14:59 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-04-22 14:59 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
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=20160422150222.GO10606@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.