From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 15:06:18 +0000 Subject: PSCI reset support - specification In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170303150617.GC12945@leverpostej> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 01:09:51PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > Hi, Hi, > I have read psci 1.0 specification available here. > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.den0022c/DEN0022C_Power_State_Coordination_Interface.pdf > > I have looked at SYSTEM_RESET where only the first parameter is setup > which is Function ID (0x8400 0009) and the rest of parameters are not > setup. The PSCI SYSTEM_RESET call only has the Function ID parameter, and no other parameters. It's not so much that they're not set up, but rather that they do not exist. > In Linux kernel we have psci_sys_reset > > static void psci_sys_reset(enum reboot_mode reboot_mode, const char *cmd) > { > invoke_psci_fn(PSCI_0_2_FN_SYSTEM_RESET, 0, 0, 0); > } > > where others parameters are zeros. > Is this done by purpose that these zeros are there? The zeroes are simply an implementation detail of the Linux-internal invoke_psci_fn() API. As SYSTEM_RESET takes no parameters other than the Function ID, a PSCI implementation must not treat the remaining parameter passing register values as meaningful. It is entirely valid for the above to be changed to: static void psci_sys_reset(enum reboot_mode reboot_mode, const char *cmd) { invoke_psci_fn(PSCI_0_2_FN_SYSTEM_RESET, get_random_long(), get_random_long(), get_random_long()); } No compliant PSCI implementation should be affected by this. > Because based on spec these are not used and value is not specified. > > For example u-boot is allocating regs on the stack and others parameters > have random values. This is correct. The remaining parameter-passing registers are unused, and are permitted to contain any value whatsoever when the call is made. Thanks, Mark.