[PATCH V4 07/62] ST SPEAr13XX: Adding machine specific src files

[shiraz.hashim@st.com (Shiraz Hashim)]

Hello Russell,

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:06:55AM +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:41:35PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-spear13xx/headsmp.S b/arch/arm/mach-spear13xx/headsmp.S
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..30761d3
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-spear13xx/headsmp.S
> > @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
> > +/*
> > + * arch/arm/mach-spear13XX/headsmp.S
> > + *
> > + * Picked from realview
> > + * Copyright (c) 2010 ST Microelectronics Limited
> > + * Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@st.com>
> > + *
> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> > + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/linkage.h>
> > +#include <linux/init.h>
> > +
> > +	__INIT
> 
> Is this ever called after the kernel text is thrown away?  What if we
> add support in the generic code to start with secondary CPUs offline
> as a power saving or boot time feature?
> 

No. SPEAr platform has no additional feature to explicitly control
this aspect of secondary CPUs. Does ARMv7 itself provdes some features
for power management of secondary CPUs ?

> > +
> > +/*
> > + * This one is picked from Tegra :-
> > + *
> > + * The secondary kernel init calls v7_flush_dcache_all before it enables
> > + * the L1; however, the L1 comes out of reset in an undefined state, so
> > + * the clean + invalidate performed by v7_flush_dcache_all causes a bunch
> > + * of cache lines with uninitialized data and uninitialized tags to get
> > + * written out to memory, which does really unpleasant things to the ain
> > + * processor. We fix this by performing an invalidate, rather than a
> > + * clean + invalidate, before jumping into the kernel.
> > + */
> > +ENTRY(v7_invalidate_l1)
> > +	mov	r0, #0
> > +	mcr	p15, 2, r0, c0, c0, 0
> > +	mrc	p15, 1, r0, c0, c0, 0
> > +
> > +	ldr	r1, =0x7fff
> > +	and	r2, r1, r0, lsr #13
> > +
> > +	ldr	r1, =0x3ff
> > +
> > +	and	r3, r1, r0, lsr #3	@ NumWays - 1
> > +	add	r2, r2, #1	@ NumSets
> > +
> > +	and	r0, r0, #0x7
> > +	add	r0, r0, #4	@ SetShift
> > +
> > +	clz	r1, r3		@ WayShift
> > +	add	r4, r3, #1	@ NumWays
> > +1:	sub	r2, r2, #1	@ NumSets--
> > +	mov	r3, r4		@ Temp = NumWays
> > +2:	subs	r3, r3, #1	@ Temp--
> > +	mov	r5, r3, lsl r1
> > +	mov	r6, r2, lsl r0
> > +	orr	r5, r5, r6	@ Reg = Temp<<WayShift)|(NumSets<<SetShift)
> > +	mcr	p15, 0, r5, c7, c6, 2
> > +	bgt	2b
> > +	cmp	r2, #0
> > +	bgt	1b
> > +	dsb
> > +	isb
> > +	mov	pc, lr
> > +ENDPROC(v7_invalidate_l1)
> 
> This code appears to have its only caller commented out.  Should it be
> removed?
> 

yes, would remove it.

> > +
> > +/*
> > + * spear13xx specific entry point for secondary CPUs. This provides
> > + * a "holding pen" into which all secondary cores are held until we're
> > + * ready for them to initialise.
> > + */
> > +ENTRY(spear13xx_secondary_startup)
> > +	/* If we don't do this then we have a crash */
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Since now this is being called from xloader so removing it
> > +	 * here
> > +	 */
> > +#if 0
> > +	bl v7_invalidate_l1
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +	mrc	p15, 0, r0, c0, c0, 5
> > +	and	r0, r0, #15
> > +	adr	r4, 1f
> > +	ldmia	r4, {r5, r6}
> > +	sub	r4, r4, r5
> > +	add	r6, r6, r4
> > +pen:	ldr	r7, [r6]
> > +	cmp	r7, r0
> > +	bne	pen
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * we've been released from the holding pen: secondary_stack
> > +	 * should now contain the SVC stack for this core
> > +	 */
> > +	b	secondary_startup
> > +
> > +	.align
> > +1:	.long	.
> > +	.long	pen_release
> ...
> > +volatile int __cpuinitdata pen_release = -1;
> > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(boot_lock);
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Write pen_release in a way that is guaranteed to be visible to all
> > + * observers, irrespective of whether they're taking part in coherency
> > + * or not. This is necessary for the hotplug code to work reliably.
> > + */
> > +static void write_pen_release(int val)
> > +{
> > +	pen_release = val;
> > +	smp_wmb();
> > +	__cpuc_flush_dcache_area((void *)&pen_release, sizeof(pen_release));
> > +	outer_clean_range(__pa(&pen_release), __pa(&pen_release + 1));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void __iomem *scu_base_addr(void)
> > +{
> > +	return __io_address(SPEAR13XX_SCU_BASE);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void __cpuinit platform_secondary_init(unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > +	/*
> > +	 * if any interrupts are already enabled for the primary
> > +	 * core (e.g. timer irq), then they will not have been enabled
> > +	 * for us: do so
> > +	 */
> > +	gic_secondary_init(0);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * let the primary processor know we're out of the
> > +	 * pen, then head off into the C entry point
> > +	 */
> > +	write_pen_release(-1);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Synchronise with the boot thread.
> > +	 */
> > +	spin_lock(&boot_lock);
> > +	spin_unlock(&boot_lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > +int __cpuinit boot_secondary(unsigned int cpu, struct task_struct *idle)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned long timeout;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * set synchronisation state between this boot processor
> > +	 * and the secondary one
> > +	 */
> > +	spin_lock(&boot_lock);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * The secondary processor is waiting to be released from
> > +	 * the holding pen - release it, then wait for it to flag
> > +	 * that it has been released by resetting pen_release.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Note that "pen_release" is the hardware CPU ID, whereas
> > +	 * "cpu" is Linux's internal ID.
> > +	 */
> > +	write_pen_release(cpu);
> > +
> > +	timeout = jiffies + (1 * HZ);
> > +	while (time_before(jiffies, timeout)) {
> > +		smp_rmb();
> > +		if (pen_release == -1)
> > +			break;
> > +
> > +		udelay(10);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * now the secondary core is starting up let it run its
> > +	 * calibrations, then wait for it to finish
> > +	 */
> > +	spin_unlock(&boot_lock);
> > +
> > +	return pen_release != -1 ? -ENOSYS : 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Initialise the CPU possible map early - this describes the CPUs
> > + * which may be present or become present in the system.
> > + */
> > +void __init smp_init_cpus(void)
> > +{
> > +	void __iomem *scu_base = scu_base_addr();
> > +	unsigned int i, ncores;
> > +
> > +	ncores = scu_base ? scu_get_core_count(scu_base) : 1;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < ncores; i++)
> > +		set_cpu_possible(i, true);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void __init wakeup_secondary(void)
> > +{
> > +	/* nobody is to be released from the pen yet */
> > +	pen_release = -1;
> 
> But pen_release starts off as -1, so is this really needed?
> 

Not required, would remove.

> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Write the address of secondary startup into the system-wide
> > +	 * location (presently it is in SRAM). The BootMonitor waits
> > +	 * for this register to become non-zero.
> > +	 * We must also send an sev to wake it up
> > +	 */
> > +	__raw_writel(BSYM(virt_to_phys(spear13xx_secondary_startup)),
> > +			__io_address(SPEAR13XX_SYS_LOCATION));
> > +
> > +	mb();
> 
> Do you really need to sync back to L2, or will a dsb() do here - and
> as the spinlock code uses dsb() + sev() together, would it make sense
> to combine the two?  (dsb() is required to ensure all previous writes
> are visible prior to the sev() executing.)

Presently L2 cache is initialized after we bootup secondary CPU but
one can have the possibility of initializing L2 earlier also.
So this would be safer.

-- 
regards
Shiraz