From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chanwoo Choi Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 3/7] ARM: EXYNOS: Support secondary CPU boot of Exynos3250 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:56:37 +0900 Message-ID: <5359F915.6030009@samsung.com> References: <1398388572-30239-1-git-send-email-cw00.choi@samsung.com> <1398388572-30239-4-git-send-email-cw00.choi@samsung.com> <5359E4E6.90102@linaro.org> <5359F5F5.7030109@samsung.com> <5359F894.4070205@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <5359F894.4070205@linaro.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tushar Behera Cc: kgene.kim@samsung.com, t.figa@samsung.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, ben-linux@fluff.org, arnd@arndb.de, olof@lixom.net, marc.zyngier@arm.com, thomas.abraham@linaro.org, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, inki.dae@samsung.com, sw0312.kim@samsung.com, hyunhee.kim@samsung.com, yj44.cho@samsung.com, chanho61.park@samsung.com, sajjan.linux@gmail.com, sachin.kamat@linaro.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 04/25/2014 02:54 PM, Tushar Behera wrote: > On 04/25/2014 11:13 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 04/25/2014 01:30 PM, Tushar Behera wrote: >>> On 04/25/2014 06:46 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >>>> This patch fix the offset of CPU boot address and don't need to send smc call >>>> of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command for secondary CPU boot because Exynos3250 removes >>>> WFE in secure mode. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi >>>> Acked-by: Kyungmin Park >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 10 ++++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c >>>> index aa01c42..386d01d 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c >>>> @@ -31,11 +31,17 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(void) >>>> static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu) >>>> { >>>> /* >>>> + * Exynos3250 doesn't need to send smc command for secondary CPU boot >>>> + * because Exynos3250 removes WFE in secure mode. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (soc_is_exynos3250()) >>>> + return 0; >>>> + /* >>>> * The second parameter of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command means CPU id. >>>> * But, Exynos4212 has only one secondary CPU so second parameter >>>> * isn't used for informing secure firmware about CPU id. >>>> */ >>>> - if (soc_is_exynos4212()) >>>> + else if (soc_is_exynos4212()) >>> >>> This changes is not required. >> >> Do you mean it as following? >> >> if (soc_is_exynos3250()) >> return 0 >> >> if (soc_is_exynos4212()) >> cpu = 0; >> > > Yes, logically the flow would be same and code would be more readable. OK, I'll fix it. Thanks, Chanwoo Choi