Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] arm: introduce psci_smp_ops
From: Will Deacon
Date: Fri Apr 26 2013 - 12:10:40 EST
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 04:36:26PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > I disagree. You're explicitly stating that we pass the `cpuid of target CPU,
> > > as from MPIDR'. That's simply not true -- the firmware could choose any
> > > numbering scheme to identify the CPUs. For KVM and Xen, it *is* the mpidr,
> > > which is why psci-smp.c works at all, but that's where the comment belongs,
> > > not in this header file.
> > At some point, the _kernel_ API for interfacing with the firmware's PSCI
> > will have to ensure uniformity somehow. The PSCI interface code could
> > translate the passed MPIDR into whatever the firmware decided to use for
> > identifying CPUs if needed, keeping this issue localized.
> That is what I had in mind when I said to keep the comment in psci.h
> We have to draw the line somewhere to expose a uniform internal kernel
> API. However it is a bit difficult to do now given that we have only one
> user of the API.
I see psci.h as representing the firmware interface, and psci-smp.c or
whatever sits on top as exposing the kernel `API'.
> I don't feel to strongly about this, please let me know what is the
> final decision and I'll update the code accordingly. I remind you that
> the merge window is approaching :-)
I'd still like the comment to be in psci-smp.c, or a header separate from
the firmware bits.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/