From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: York Sun Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:21:26 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] ARMv8 spin-table patches In-Reply-To: <20140714140349.GE26465@leverpostej> References: <53AD97BB.4020004@freescale.com> <20140627164405.GY9006@bill-the-cat> <20140704092909.GE31812@leverpostej> <1404791280.21434.270.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <20140714140349.GE26465@leverpostej> Message-ID: <53C43BC6.2020507@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 07/14/2014 07:03 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: > Unfortunately I don't have an answer to that; the arm64 Linux spin-table > documentation and code were all written before I was involved. > > The unfortunate truth is that a lot of the ARM DT and boot unification > work was done somewhat blindly, with many subtleties being lost. Someone > implemented spin-table with a shared address because it happened to be > easier, and then it got copied. Now that people are actively using it > it's not possible to remove it, and it's difficult to dissuade others > from following the crowd. > > If U-Boot provides each CPU with its own unique address, then that would > be fantastic, and certainly avoids one nasty edge-case. In the patch set I sent for review, each CPU has its own spin table. It has an option to use a single release address, or individual release address. York