From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/31] arm64: SMP support Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 02:21:33 -0700 Message-ID: <20120817092133.GR11011@atomide.com> References: <1344966752-16102-1-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <1344966752-16102-16-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.71]:29256 "EHLO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756077Ab2HQJVg (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Aug 2012 05:21:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1344966752-16102-16-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Catalin Marinas Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Will Deacon , Marc Zyngier * Catalin Marinas [120814 11:05]: > This patch adds SMP initialisation and spinlocks implementation for > AArch64. The spinlock support uses the new load-acquire/store-release > instructions to avoid explicit barriers. The architecture also specifies > that an event is automatically generated when clearing the exclusive > monitor state to wake up processors in WFE, so there is no need for an > explicit DSB/SEV instruction sequence. The SEVL instruction is used to > set the exclusive monitor locally as there is no conditional WFE and a > branch is more expensive. Do we always have SMP hardware on arm64? Or are we going to need to again add smp_on_up support later on? Other than that: Acked-by: Tony Lindgren