From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lina.iyer@linaro.org (Lina Iyer) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 10:17:59 -0600 Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Add smp booting support for Qualcomm ARMv8 SoCs In-Reply-To: <20150414223242.GA18888@e107981-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1428601031-5366-1-git-send-email-galak@codeaurora.org> <20150410100529.GA6854@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <493B15F8-0EBE-4633-9604-671EF403F36E@codeaurora.org> <20150410161052.GF6854@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20150413094117.GA2745@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <245B9FDD-E1B5-41E4-9F24-4D5BB86C450E@codeaurora.org> <20150414223242.GA18888@e107981-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Message-ID: <20150415161759.GB1111@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Apr 14 2015 at 16:32 -0600, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: >On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 03:21:17PM +0100, Kumar Gala wrote: > >[...] > >> > Looking beyond this set of patches, I can foresee that you won't care >> > about the generic arm64 cpuidle driver either, or more precisely the >> > separation between cpuidle subsystem+driver and the SoC-specific >> > back-end (cpu_operations). >> >> That's probably true for what I guess are a number of reasons. I'm guessing the arm64 cpuidle driver expects PSCI. > >Wrap lines sensibly please. > >The arm64 cpuidle driver, that is now arm generic cpuidle driver does >not expect anything apart from an enable-method (and you pulled >part of its back-end implementation for arm32 Qualcomm platforms, FYI). > The backend for this SoC would leverage the same platform code as ARM32. The cpu_operations callbacks for init and suspend will call into the the same platform functions used by arm32 QCOM SoCs. Thanks, Lina >It took years to consolidate it and the main reason was the lack of >standard interfaces for power down/up sequences that this patchset of >yours wants to promote in arm64 world. > >The lack of standard power interfaces may not have been an issue for you, >who cares about Qualcomm code, it has been a sore issue for people >trying to generalize things across ARM platforms in the kernel, which is >the only sensible way forward. > >PSCI is a standard interface (and Qualcomm are already contributing to >it, for the records) that can certainly be extended, and you are welcome >to contribute to it, but certainly not ignored. > >Thanks, >Lorenzo >-- >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in >the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org >More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html