[PATCH 3/3] soc: xilinx: zynqmp: Add firmware interface
Michal Simek
michal.simek at xilinx.com
Wed Aug 16 07:34:44 PDT 2017
On 16.8.2017 16:00, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 16.8.2017 14:41, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Michal Simek <michal.simek at xilinx.com> wrote:
>>> On 14.8.2017 17:06, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Michal Simek <michal.simek at xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>>> +static noinline int do_fw_call_smc(u64 arg0, u64 arg1, u64 arg2,
>>>>> + u32 *ret_payload)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct arm_smccc_res res;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + arm_smccc_smc(arg0, arg1, arg2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, &res);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (ret_payload) {
>>>>> + ret_payload[0] = (u32)res.a0;
>>>>> + ret_payload[1] = (u32)(res.a0 >> 32);
>>>>> + ret_payload[2] = (u32)res.a1;
>>>>> + ret_payload[3] = (u32)(res.a1 >> 32);
>>>>> + ret_payload[4] = (u32)res.a2;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + return zynqmp_pm_ret_code((enum pm_ret_status)res.a0);
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> It looks like you forgot to add the cpu_to_le32/le32_to_cpu conversions
>>>> here to make this work on big-endian kernels.
>>>
>>> We have discussed support for big endian kernels in past and discussion
>>> end up with that there is no customer for this. It means I can change
>>> this but none will use this.
>>
>> Ok, thanks. As a general rule, I prefer kernel code to be written
>> in a portable way even when you assume that is not necessary.
>>
>> Besides the obvious problem of users that end up wanting to do
>> something you don't expect, there is the more general issue of
>> copying code into another driver that may need to be more portable.
>
>
> I fully understand this. Let me play with it but I expect there will be
> different issues then just this.
>
What do you think?
ret_payload[0] = lower_32_bits(le64_to_cpu(res.a0));
ret_payload[1] = upper_32_bits(le64_to_cpu(res.a0));
ret_payload[2] = lower_32_bits(le64_to_cpu(res.a1));
ret_payload[3] = upper_32_bits(le64_to_cpu(res.a1));
ret_payload[4] = lower_32_bits(le64_to_cpu(res.a2));
There should be probably also change in invoke_pm_fn to do conversion
from cpu to le64.
int invoke_pm_fn(u32 pm_api_id, u32 arg0, u32 arg1, u32 arg2, u32 arg3,
u32 *ret_payload)
{
/*
* Added SIP service call Function Identifier
* Make sure to stay in x0 register
*/
u64 smc_arg[4];
smc_arg[0] = cpu_to_le64(PM_SIP_SVC | pm_api_id);
smc_arg[1] = cpu_to_le64(((u64)arg1 << 32) | arg0);
smc_arg[2] = cpu_to_le64(((u64)arg3 << 32) | arg2);
return do_fw_call(smc_arg[0], smc_arg[1], smc_arg[2], ret_payload);
}
This is not tested on BE just on LE.
Thanks,
Michal
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list