[PATCH 1/3] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings
Catalin Marinas
catalin.marinas at arm.com
Fri Mar 21 10:52:22 EDT 2014
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 05:52:53PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 05:19:32PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 01:43:57PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > To be honest at this point I think what I want to do is go back to the
> > > original approach of layering DT on top of MPIDR. MPIDR is smaller and
> > > simpler code so seems more likely to make progress. I really do expect
> > > that for a very large proportion of systems it'll be sufficient.
>
> > Do you mean the physical MPIDR_EL1 or the DT representation of
> > MPIDR_EL1?
>
> Well, the affinities need to be the same anyway (so we can tie the
> hardware to the description in DT) though we need to use the physical
> register to get the MT bit since the binding requires that this be
> omitted from the value stored in DT. Lorenzo was keen on paying
> attention to the MT bit which does seem like a reasonable thing to do.
OK, as long as topology in DT takes priority (in case the hardware got
it wrong).
--
Catalin
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list