Hi,
On 04/25/2014 01:30 PM, Tushar Behera wrote:
> On 04/25/2014 06:46 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> This patch fix the offset of CPU boot address and don't need to send smc call
>> of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command for secondary CPU boot because Exynos3250 removes
>> WFE in secure mode.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 10 ++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> index aa01c42..386d01d 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> @@ -31,11 +31,17 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(void)
>> static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
>> {
>> /*
>> + * Exynos3250 doesn't need to send smc command for secondary CPU boot
>> + * because Exynos3250 removes WFE in secure mode.
>> + */
>> + if (soc_is_exynos3250())
>> + return 0;
>> + /*
>> * The second parameter of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command means CPU id.
>> * But, Exynos4212 has only one secondary CPU so second parameter
>> * isn't used for informing secure firmware about CPU id.
>> */
>> - if (soc_is_exynos4212())
>> + else if (soc_is_exynos4212())
>
> This changes is not required.
Do you mean it as following?
if (soc_is_exynos3250())
return 0
if (soc_is_exynos4212())
cpu = 0;
>
>> cpu = 0;
>>
>> exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT, cpu, 0, 0);
>> @@ -46,7 +52,7 @@ static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
>> {
>> void __iomem *boot_reg = S5P_VA_SYSRAM_NS + 0x1c;
>>
>> - if (!soc_is_exynos4212())
>> + if (!soc_is_exynos4212() && !soc_is_exynos3250())
>> boot_reg += 4*cpu;
>>
>> __raw_writel(boot_addr, boot_reg);
>>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
