From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: samuel@sholland.org (Samuel Holland)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 09:54:01 -0600
Subject: [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64: allwinner: h6: add the basical Allwinner H6
 DTSI file
In-Reply-To: <20180226092645.xghkmfowenzlbm42@flea.lan>
References: <20180223123555.64009-6-icenowy@aosc.io>
 <20180223123555.64009-7-icenowy@aosc.io>
 <20180223152038.2bflylwa6vj4gzfj@flea.lan>
 <81D53DC5-7622-430E-A530-ED0DE5397DC3@aosc.io>
 <20180226092645.xghkmfowenzlbm42@flea.lan>
Message-ID: <b9bc5944-b9e3-91d7-8012-c87a2b2d17fa@sholland.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 02/26/18 03:26, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 11:22:06PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>>>> +	psci {
>>>> +		compatible = "arm,psci-0.2";
>>>> +		method = "smc";
>>>> +	};
>>>
>>> Is it needed? The bootloader should fill it with whatever version it
>>> has, shouldn't it?
>>
>> But we now use ATF rather than U-Boot PSCI. U-Boot will not fill ATF
>> info.
>>
>> See A64/H5 device trees.
> 
> So if the PSCI version implemented in ATF ever changes, we would have
> to update all the DT everywhere, but only if you're running the new
> version?

Yes but no. PSCI 1.0 is generally backward compatible with PSCI 0.2. In fact,
the Linux driver treats them exactly the same:

        { .compatible = "arm,psci-0.2", .data = psci_0_2_init},
        { .compatible = "arm,psci-1.0", .data = psci_0_2_init},

For the H6, however, the oldest ATF source available (which I believe was the
one in use during bringup) is based on mainline 1.4, and is already at PSCI
version 1.1:

[    0.000000] psci: probing for conduit method from DT.
[    0.000000] psci: PSCIv1.1 detected in firmware.
[    0.000000] psci: Using standard PSCI v0.2 function IDs
[    0.000000] psci: MIGRATE_INFO_TYPE not supported.

So we could go ahead and bump the compatible to "arm,psci-1.0".

Thanks,
Samuel