CPU_METHOD_OF_DECLARE() with Linux as non-secure OS

[mans@mansr.com (Måns Rullgård)]

Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr> writes:

> On 29/10/2015 17:03, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>
>> Mason writes:
>> 
>>> I'm working on a dual-core SoC (Cortex-A9 MPCore) with Linux running
>>> as the non-secure OS. The secure OS implements some of the APIs used
>>> in OMAP2 via SMC.
>>>
>>> To start the second core, I used to define .smp in my DT_MACHINE_START
>>> definition, but Arnd wrote: "There are other ways to do [.smp and .restart]
>>> too, see CPU_METHOD_OF_DECLARE() and register_restart_handler()."
>>>
>>> Is CPU_METHOD_OF_DECLARE() the way to go?
>>> Is it "compatible" with executing smc to ask the secure OS to do whatever
>>> is needed to start the second core? (I don't understand why starting cores
>>> is secure OS responsibility.)
>>>
>>> I've located three relevant secure OS services:
>>> get_aux_core_boot
>>> set_aux_core_boot0
>>> set_aux_core_boot_addr
>>>
>>> I'm looking for guidance. What mach-* should I take as a reference to
>>> implement "second core startup from non-secure OS"?
>> 
>> See https://github.com/mansr/linux-tangox/commit/717dd5fab87aa90255460ba409970331cb577247
>
> I discussed cpu1 startup with the firmware author; he said the
> secure OS does all the heavy lifting, Linux is only expected to
> provide secondary_startup. AFAICT, we don't need to jump hoops
> like mach-vexpress did.

No major hoops really, and it's nice to have there as an extra safety
check.

> I don't think you can define the cpus node in your smp87xx.dtsi
> because smp8756 is single-core.

OK, I'll fix that.

> BTW, I see that you've tried to enable L2C. I would expect your
> board would panic?
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/447493

I hacked around that, and everything works fine.  Nice performance boost
too.

There's also something wrong with the L2C-310 aux control register
setting.  The SMC call ID from OMAP (0x109) which is also used in some
Sigma code I found somewhere doesn't seem to do anything, so the
register is left at the value set by the secure boot code.  Perhaps you
can check with your firmware guy if there's another way of writing that
register.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com