[PATCH v2 1/6] arm64/hyperv: Support DeviceTree

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 15/05/2024 00:43, Roman Kisel wrote:
> The Virtual Trust Level platforms rely on DeviceTree, and the
> arm64/hyperv code supports ACPI only. Update the logic to
> support DeviceTree on boot as well as ACPI.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roman Kisel <romank at linux.microsoft.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c b/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c
> index b1a4de4eee29..208a3bcb9686 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c
> @@ -15,6 +15,9 @@
>  #include <linux/errno.h>
>  #include <linux/version.h>
>  #include <linux/cpuhotplug.h>
> +#include <linux/libfdt.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_fdt.h>
>  #include <asm/mshyperv.h>
>  
>  static bool hyperv_initialized;
> @@ -27,6 +30,29 @@ int hv_get_hypervisor_version(union hv_hypervisor_version_info *info)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static bool hyperv_detect_fdt(void)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> +	const unsigned long hyp_node = of_get_flat_dt_subnode_by_name(
> +			of_get_flat_dt_root(), "hypervisor");

Why do you add an ABI for node name? Although name looks OK, but is it
really described in the spec that you depend on it? I really do not like
name dependencies...

Where is the binding for this?

Best regards,
Krzysztof