From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bjorn.andersson@linaro.org (Bjorn Andersson) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:50:05 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 5/8] firmware: qcom: scm: Use atomic SCM for cold boot In-Reply-To: <1461363432-5730-6-git-send-email-andy.gross@linaro.org> References: <1461363432-5730-1-git-send-email-andy.gross@linaro.org> <1461363432-5730-6-git-send-email-andy.gross@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20160422235005.GI3202@tuxbot> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri 22 Apr 15:17 PDT 2016, Andy Gross wrote: > This patch changes the cold_set_boot_addr function to use atomic SCM > calls. This removes the need for memory allocation and instead places > all arguments in registers. > > Signed-off-by: Andy Gross > --- > drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm-32.c [..] > /* > * Set the cold/warm boot address for one of the CPU cores. > */ > -static int qcom_scm_set_boot_addr(u32 addr, int flags) > +static int qcom_scm_set_boot_addr(u32 addr, int flags, bool do_atomic) > { > struct { > __le32 flags; > __le32 addr; > } cmd; > > - cmd.addr = cpu_to_le32(addr); > - cmd.flags = cpu_to_le32(flags); > - return qcom_scm_call(QCOM_SCM_SVC_BOOT, QCOM_SCM_BOOT_ADDR, > - &cmd, sizeof(cmd), NULL, 0); > + if (do_atomic) { > + return qcom_scm_call_atomic(QCOM_SCM_SVC_BOOT, > + QCOM_SCM_BOOT_ADDR, 2, flags, addr); > + } else { > + > + cmd.addr = cpu_to_le32(addr); > + cmd.flags = cpu_to_le32(flags); > + > + return qcom_scm_call(QCOM_SCM_SVC_BOOT, QCOM_SCM_BOOT_ADDR, > + &cmd, sizeof(cmd), NULL, 0); > + } I would prefer that you split this into two functions, rather than hiding two functions bodies in one function. Perhaps qcom_scm_set_boot_addr and qcom_scm_set_boot_addr_atomic? > } > Regards, Bjorn