Need suggestions for smp related properties in cpus.yaml to support smpboot for cortex-r52 based platform

[Sudeep Holla]

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 10:35:37AM +0100, Ayan Kumar Halder wrote:
> Hi Device Tree engineers,
>
> Recently I have ported Xen on Cortex-R52 (AArch32-V8R processor) for our AMD
> platform.
>

I remember that there was some exploration on feasibility of using PSCI
here. What happened to that ? Any summary why that was dropped ?

> I was discussing with xen-devel community about how we can properly support
> smpboot when I was suggested that this might be the correct forum for
> discussion.
>
> Please refer
> https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2023-05/msg00224.html
> and the follow-ups for context.
>
>
> The way smpboot works on our platform is as follows:-
>
> 1. core0 writes to register (say regA) the address of the secondary core
> initialization routine.
>
> 2. core0 writes to another register (say regB) the value "0x1" to put the
> secondary core in reset mode.
>
> 3. core0 writes to regB the value "0x0" to pull the secondary core out of
> reset mode.
>
> regA, regB will differ for core1, core2, core3 and so on.
>

Sounds OK but will you ever need to support power management on these cores ?
If so, just start with PSCI or provide reasons as why it doesn't fit well
before exploring and extending the existing spin table bindings.

>
> Currently, I am trying to bringup core1 only.
>
>
> I am thinking to use "enable-method=spin-table" in the cpu node for core1. 
> So that I can use "cpu-release-address" for regA.
>
> For regB, I am thinking of introducing a new property "amd-cpu-reset-addr"
> in the cpu node.
>
> Please let me know your thoughts on this approach. I am also open to any
> alternative suggestions.
>
>
> Also I see that in https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4-rc1/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml#L87
> , "arm,cortex-r52" is missing.
>

Yes that should be fine IMO.

> Can I submit a patch (a one line change) to add this ?
>

Of course, it makes it easy to accept or reject rather than this question
hidden as part of other discussion.

--
Regards,
Sudeep