[PATCH] ARM: /proc/atags: Export also for DT

[Tony Lindgren]

* Pali Rohár <pali.rohar at gmail.com> [150128 07:50]:
> On Wednesday 28 January 2015 16:39:13 Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Nicolas Pitre <nico at fluxnic.net> [150128 06:37]:
> > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2015, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 28 January 2015 01:50:33 Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > > On omaps, the bootrom passes the bootreason in r1 to the
> > > > > bootloader that can do whatever it wants with it. We
> > > > > could maybe pass it in the kernel cmdline to the
> > > > > watchdog driver for user space?
> > > > 
> > > > Not truth for N900. Bootreason depends on PRM_RSTST omap
> > > > register, state of vbat charger pins, time how long was
> > > > power key pressed, R&D data stored in CAL partition and
> > > > other undocumented registers for omap HS devices. I
> > > > already tried to implement at least some subset of it in
> > > > userspace (or kernel), but it is impossible because NOLO
> > > > bootloader clear status of PRM_RSTST register.
> > > > 
> > > > There is also copy of PRM_RSTST register stored at address
> > > > 0x4020FFB8 (tracing data) but that address is rewritten
> > > > (probably by kernel), so we really cannot implement
> > > > reading bootreason in kernel.
> > > > 
> > > > But in early stage in uboot it is possible to read
> > > > 0x4020FFB8 address and get some part of bootreason. But
> > > > still PRM_RSTST is not enough!
> > > > 
> > > > I would be happy if DT kernel can export /proc/atags file
> > > > with ATAGs passed by bootloader. It would be enough for
> > > > me. In userspace I can parse content and do what is
> > > > needed.
> > > 
> > > What about defining a DT boot reason property instead?
> > > Maybe it already exists?  If not, it's something that could
> > > certainly be generically used on other platforms too.
> > > 
> > > Converting the special ATAG into its standard DT equivalent
> > > would then be trivial and much cleaner overall.
> > 
> > Sounds good to me as then we don't have to add any legacy
> > custom Nokia specific atag. And it won't prevent us from
> > adding a generic ATAG_BOOTREASON if really needed.
> 
> And what would new atag ATAG_BOOTREASON solve for Nokia N900? 
> Nothing.

Right, so probably no need to add it then :) But what Nico is
saying we can translate the Nokia custom bootreason to a
standard DT property if I'm reading right.

Regards,

Tony