[PATCH 4/6] arm64: Add DTS support for FSL's LS2085A SoC
Kumar Gala
galak at codeaurora.org
Fri Aug 15 08:43:51 PDT 2014
On Aug 15, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder at freescale.com> wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak at codeaurora.org]
>> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 10:26 AM
>> To: Basu Arnab-B45036
>> Cc: Mark Rutland; Sharma Bhupesh-B45370; arnd at arndb.de; Catalin Marinas;
>> devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; Will Deacon; Yoder Stuart-B08248;
>> grant.likely at secretlab.ca; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] arm64: Add DTS support for FSL's LS2085A SoC
>>
>>
>> On Aug 15, 2014, at 10:21 AM, arnab.basu at freescale.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> + cpus {
>>>>> + #address-cells = <2>;
>>>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* We have 4 clusters having 2 Cortex-A57 cores each */
>>>>> + cpu at 0 {
>>>>> + device_type = "cpu";
>>>>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a57";
>>>>> + reg = <0x0 0x0>;
>>>>> + enable-method = "spin-table";
>>>>> + cpu-release-addr = <0x0 0x8000fff8>;
>>>>> + };
>>>>
>>>> I would strongly recommend having a unique cpu-release-addr for each CPU.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is more of a place holder, we intend to patch this address from U-Boot
>>> and use individual release addresses for each CPU.
>>
>> If you are going to patch it in u-boot, than why not just have u-boot add the
>> property and drop it from here.
>>
>> If you intend to keep it here, than make <0x0 0x0> and add a comment that says
>> u-boot will fill it out
>
> As I said to Mark re: the comment on having different release addresses
> per CPU, we are just following existing practice from the existing
> arch/arm64 device trees:
> apm-storm.dtsi
> foundation-v8.dts
> rtsm_ve-aemv8a.dts
>
> I think one of the reasons the cpu-release-addr is not 0x0 is that
> UEFI had(?)/has(?) limited ability to do device tree fix ups. It's
> not a problem at all in u-boot, but there is some reason all
> existing device trees have the same hardcoded address for all
> CPUs.
Are you guys planning on supporting UEFI on this platform?
> So we want to do the standard/conventional thing here that will
> allow are device trees to be used in more than u-boot.
Well, I think the guys would say the standard thing is to move to PSCI.
- k
>
> Thanks,
> Stuart
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list