Re: [PATCH v3] firmware/psci: add support for SYSTEM_RESET2

Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-04-12T14:19:46Z

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 02:42:22PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 02:37:05PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > Sudeep, Lorenzo, Mark
> >
> > On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 at 12:15, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 12:10:45PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Friday, April 12, 2019 12:02:27 PM CEST Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > > > > PSCI v1.1 introduced SYSTEM_RESET2 to allow both architectural resets
> > > > > where the semantics are described by the PSCI specification itself as
> > > > > well as vendor-specific resets. Currently only system warm reset
> > > > > semantics is defined as part of architectural resets by the specification.
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch implements support for SYSTEM_RESET2 by making using of
> > > > > reboot_mode passed by the reboot infrastructure in the kernel.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > > > > Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/firmware/psci.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > include/uapi/linux/psci.h | 2 ++
> > > > > 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > --
> > > >
> > > > So I queued up the PSCI series from Ulf which clashes with this patch.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ah OK, I wasn't aware(just back from holiday) that it's going through
> > > your tree. No worries, I will rebase and repost soon. I want testing
> > > by xilinx or Aaro Koskinen before that.
> > >
> > > > I can take this one too, but I'd rather avoid becoming a PSCI maintainer as a
> > > > result. :-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > I can understand, I assure it's one off :)
> >
> > Speaking about that. I would gladly help out to host a git tree to
> > collect patches that you have acked. In this way, we can, for example,
> > get the patches pre-tested in linux next before we send the
> > pull-request.
> >
> > If you think sounds like a good idea, just tell me so I can prepare a
> > tree for the next release cycle...
> >
>
> For now, I just have this one patch. So if Rafael has queued all your
> patches, I can just rebase and post it once I get tested-by from Aaro
> Koskinen, so that Rafael can queue this too. Or are you planning to
> send PR to Rafael, sorry if I missed details already discussed on the
> list.

Mark and I can queue PSCI patches as we usually do, we agreed they would
go via Rafael's tree (thanks) because of dependencies with the PM tree
(that did not turn out to be there so we could have sent them to arm-soc
just as well as we usually do), next cycle if and when there are patches
to be queued we will queue them up and send them upstream ourselves.

Thanks,
Lorenzo