[PATCH 1/5] ARM: tegra20: cpuidle: add powered-down state for secondary CPU

[Stephen Warren]

On 12/04/2012 12:05 AM, Joseph Lo wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 02:31 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 12/02/2012 08:00 PM, Joseph Lo wrote:
>>> The powered-down state of Tegra20 requires power gating both CPU cores.
>>> When the secondary CPU requests to enter powered-down state, it saves
>>> its own contexts and then enters WFI. The Tegra20 had a limition to
>>> power down both CPU cores. The secondary CPU must waits for CPU0 in
>>> powered-down state too. If the secondary CPU be woken up before CPU0
>>> entering powered-down state, then it needs to restore its CPU states
>>> and waits for next chance.
>>>
>>> Be aware of that, you may see the legacy power state "LP2" in the code
>>> which is exactly the same meaning of "CPU power down".
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/sleep-tegra20.S b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/sleep-tegra20.S
>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * tegra_pen_lock
>>> + *
>>> + * spinlock implementation with no atomic test-and-set and no coherence
>>> + * using Peterson's algorithm on strongly-ordered registers
>>> + * used to synchronize a cpu waking up from wfi with entering lp2 on idle
>>> + *
>>> + * SCRATCH37 = r1 = !turn (inverted from Peterson's algorithm)
>>
>> A link to a description of that algorithm would be useful.
>>
> This algorithm was very famous. It can be very easy to find on the
> internet. But if you want the link of the paper, it may not be
> available. It usually need to access the paper as a member.
> 
> Can you accept a link from wikipedia?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterson's_algorithm#cite_ref-1

Yes, that's fine (although I'd drop the anchor from the URL; i.e. remove
"#cite_ref-1").

>>> + * on cpu 0:
>>> + * SCRATCH38 = r2 = flag[0]
>>> + * SCRATCH39 = r3 = flag[1]
>>> + * on cpu1:
>>> + * SCRATCH39 = r2 = flag[1]
>>> + * SCRATCH38 = r3 = flag[0]
>>
>> That implies that r2/r3 are used for different purposes on the 2 CPUs,
>> and/or shadow the values of different registers. However, I see nothing
>> in the code which is conditional on cpu ID.
> 
> here:
> +       cpu_id  r0
> +       add     r1, r3, #PMC_SCRATCH37
> +       cmp     r0, #0
> +       addeq   r2, r3, #PMC_SCRATCH38
> +       addeq   r3, r3, #PMC_SCRATCH39
> +       addne   r2, r3, #PMC_SCRATCH39
> +       addne   r3, r3, #PMC_SCRATCH38
> It's proper to say that the SCRATCH38/SCRATCH39 are used for dedicate
> cpu lock flag on the 2 CPUs.

Doh. I overlooked the "cpu_id" invocation.