[PATCH v16 2/9] ARM: hisi: enable MCPM implementation

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Haojian Zhuang wrote:

> On 5 August 2014 09:02, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre at linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> >
> >> On 5 August 2014 06:43, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre at linaro.org> wrote:
> >> > Sorry for the delay -- I was on vacation.
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, 4 Aug 2014, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Multiple CPU clusters are used in Hisilicon HiP04 SoC. Now use MCPM
> >> >> framework to manage power on HiP04 SoC.
> >> >>
> >> >> Changelog:
> >> >> v16:
> >> >>   * Parse bootwrapper parameters in command line instead.
> >> >
> >> > What is that about?  I don't particularly like to see bootloader
> >> > handshake details passed to the kernel via the kernel command line
> >> > mechanism.  Given this looks like special memory regions, can't they be
> >> > specified via the device tree instead?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Others don't agree put them into DTS file. So I move them into command line.
> >
> > Could you give me a pointer to the discussion around that please?
> >
> >
> > Nicolas
> 
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-July/275944.html
> 
> Mark challenged what's relationship between bootwrapper address and 
> system controller.

There is no relation, obviously.  Hence this doesn't belong in the 
system controller node.  That doesn't mean it should not be in DT at 
all.

> Actually code in bootwrapper is like trampoline. And it's a software 
> protocol, not hardware description. So I moved them into command line 
> instead.

There are many examples for software protocols being specified in DT 
already.  The first that comes to my mind is the "boot method = spin 
table" which has nothing to do with hardware.  PSCI bindings are about 
another software-only thing.


Nicolas