[PATCH v5 02/11] ARM/ARM64: KVM: Add base for PSCI v0.2 emulation

[Rob Herring]

On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Christoffer Dall
<christoffer.dall at linaro.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 09:54:55AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
>> On 22 March 2014 04:57, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall at linaro.org> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 06:23:25PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
>> >> Currently, the in-kernel PSCI emulation provides PSCI v0.1 interface to
>> >> VCPUs. This patch extends current in-kernel PSCI emulation to provide
>> >> PSCI v0.2 interface to VCPUs.
>> >>
>> >> By default, ARM/ARM64 KVM will always provide PSCI v0.1 interface for
>> >> keeping the ABI backward-compatible.
>> >>
>> >> To select PSCI v0.2 interface for VCPUs, the user space (i.e. QEMU or
>> >> KVMTOOL) will have to set KVM_ARM_VCPU_PSCI_0_2 feature when doing VCPU
>> >> init using KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT ioctl.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel at linaro.org>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Pranavkumar Sawargaonkar <pranavkumar at linaro.org>
>> >
>> > The content here can carry my Reviewed-by tag, but I think Rob's point
>> > about sharing this code between KVM arm/arm64 and the PSCI code itself
>> > it important, see:
>> >
>> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-March/241792.html
>>
>> My apologies, I totally missed Rob's comment.
>
> No worries at all.
>
>>
>> My suggestion would be to have:
>> arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/psci.h
>> arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/psci.h
>
> I think the suggestion was to move all this to include/uapi/linux/psci.h
> or something equivalent so also arm and arm64 can share these defines,
> but maybe I read too much into it.

Yes. It is perfectly fine for a somewhat architecture specific header
to live in include/linux (or include/uapi/linux).

Rob