From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren)
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 08:53:30 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] arm: omap: RX-51: ARM errata 430973 workaround
In-Reply-To: <5154165C.4050604@ti.com>
References: <517283541.62064.1362124023621.JavaMail.apache@mail81.abv.bg>
 <20130306175120.GP11806@atomide.com> <201303062013.16302@pali>
 <201303241526.59275@pali> <20130327205606.GN10155@atomide.com>
 <20130328095011.GS30923@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <5154165C.4050604@ti.com>
Message-ID: <20130328155330.GS10155@atomide.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

* Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> [130328 03:10]:
> On Thursday 28 March 2013 03:20 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 01:56:07PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >> * Pali Roh?r <pali.rohar@gmail.com> [130324 07:31]:
> >>> it is possible to upstream errata 430973 workaround for RX-51?
> >>
> >> I think we should make the SMC handling a generic function for ARM.
> >>
> >> AFAIK just the SMC call numbering is different for various
> >> implementations. So the handler and passing of the parameters
> >> seems like it should be generic.
> > 
> > SMC calls vary greatly in how they are handled.  The only thing that's
> > generic is issuing the SMC call.  All the setup and what arguments are
> > required are completely different from SoC to SoC.
> > 
> > For example, some SoCs require arguments passed via memory.  Others like
> > OMAP its via registers.
> 
> Exactly. As somebody said on the list, that code looks identical but
> it is not. An SMC with barrier instruction is mostly common and nothing
> more than that.

Thanks all, case closed then. There's no way to come up with a generic
SMC function.

Regards,

Tony