On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 00:10:17 -0700
Antoine Ténart <antoine.tenart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Jisheng,
>
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 02:31:13PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 02:21:02 -0700
> > Antoine Ténart <antoine.tenart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > +
> > > +extern void berlin_secondary_startup(void);
> > > +extern u32 boot_inst;
> > > +
> > > +static void __iomem *cpu_ctrl;
> > > +
> > > +static inline void berlin_reset_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> > > +{
> > > + u32 val;
> > > +
> > > + val = readl(cpu_ctrl + CPU_RESET);
> > > + val |= BIT(cpu_logical_map(cpu));
> > > + writel(val, cpu_ctrl + CPU_RESET);
> >
> > "writel(BIT(cpu_logical_map(cpu)), cpu_ctrl + CPU_RESET)" is enough.
> > we don't need to read and modify, because we writing 0 has no any effect.
>
> The reset bit is automatically cleared but I dumped the register value
> and it wasn't 0x0, that's why I preferred to read first and only set the
> reset bit.
>
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Write the first instruction the CPU will execute after being
> > > reseted
> > > + * in the reset exception register.
> > > + */
> > > + writel(boot_inst, vectors_base + RESET_VECT);
> >
> > Is it better to let bootloader/firmware handle this writing. Then, we can
> > also remove the tricky boot_inst in headsmp.S.
>
> We thought about it, and since it can be difficult to update the
> bootloader for some boards, like BG2 based ones, we preferred to include
> this here.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Antoine
>
Got your points. Thanks very much
--
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
