From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: f.fainelli@gmail.com (Florian Fainelli) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 11:41:57 -0700 Subject: [GIT PULL 2/2] bcm2835-soc-next-2017-08-15 In-Reply-To: <87valmgoln.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> References: <20170815180325.12809-1-eric@anholt.net> <20170815180325.12809-2-eric@anholt.net> <36766926-c8d6-b768-59b6-4ff302a6a5ba@gmail.com> <87valmgoln.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> Message-ID: <31bfcd7b-246e-50b9-081f-80ba704b4e64@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 08/17/2017 09:12 AM, Eric Anholt wrote: > Florian Fainelli writes: > >> On 08/15/2017 11:03 AM, Eric Anholt wrote: >>> The following changes since commit f29c256853b7412961d3ee80ca525bd2530573db: >>> >>> ARM: dts: bcm283x: Add 32-bit enable method for SMP (2017-08-14 20:09:44 +0200) >>> >>> are available in the git repository at: >>> >>> git://github.com/anholt/linux tags/bcm2835-soc-next-2017-08-15 >>> >>> for you to fetch changes up to 067b437e55a892e3ebb13e40c98825fcfa1e2d99: >>> >>> ARM: bcm2836: Send event when onlining other cores (2017-08-15 10:52:26 -0700) >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>> This pull request brings in two things. >>> >>> One is to use sev() to wake up CPUs that might be sleeping when doing >>> the custom spin-table boot process in 32-bit mode (new firmware >>> versions will have the CPUs sleeping waiting for an event instead of >>> just spinning). However, the irqchip maintainer objected to our SMP >>> code continuing to live in the driver, so we had to move it to >>> platsmp.c, and to do that we needed a new SMP enable-method to the DT >>> for the platsmp.c to attach to (thus the DT cross-merge in this PR). >>> The platsmp.c patch was acked by irqchip for going through arm-soc. >> >> This does make us pull quite a lot of changes, how about I just >> cherry-pick "ARM: dts: bcm283x: Add 32-bit enable method for SMP" such >> that the branch in itself is functional as-is, but we don't pull in >> everything else from devicetree/next? > > Then you get the commit duplicated in the history, which people > generally dislike even more. Also, it depends on the arm64->arm move, > so you'd need that as well. Alright, merged and now submitted, thanks! -- -- Florian