From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robherring2@gmail.com (Rob Herring) Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:13:22 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 7/7] dts: calxeda: add ARM PSCI binding In-Reply-To: <20130729102424.GA24255@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1375048598-15637-1-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <1375048598-15637-8-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <20130729102424.GA24255@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Message-ID: <51F66A72.7070209@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/29/2013 05:24 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 10:56:38PM +0100, Rob Herring wrote: >> From: Rob Herring >> >> Add the PSCI binding for Calxeda SOCs. The PSCI function numbers are >> different from the DT binding example because the numbering changed in >> revisions of the PSCI spec and are already fixed in highbank firmware. >> Since the numbering is transparent to the kernel, this difference is not >> significant. >> >> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring >> --- >> arch/arm/boot/dts/ecx-common.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/ecx-common.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/ecx-common.dtsi >> index e8559b7..f1dfc09 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/ecx-common.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/ecx-common.dtsi >> @@ -19,6 +19,16 @@ >> bootargs = "console=ttyAMA0"; >> }; >> >> + psci { >> + compatible = "arm,psci"; >> + method = "smc"; >> + cpu_suspend = <0x84000002>; >> + cpu_off = <0x84000004>; >> + cpu_on = <0x84000006>; >> + system_off = <0x84000100>; >> + system_reset = <0x84000101>; >> + }; >> + > > I see this is somewhat beyond the original PSCI, given the addition of > SYSTEM_OFF and SYSTEM_RESET, but not quite PSCI 0.2 as you don't have > PSCI_VERSION. I do actually support PSCI_VERSION. Forgot to add that to the dts. > It would be nice it the compatible string were more specific here to > deal with this and any implementation-specific power_state ID values. > Something like "calxeda,highbank-psci", "arm,psci" ? Is that something we always want to do? You can't really know the implementation quirks up front. Rob