Hi Anup, On Wed, Dec 18 2013 at 03:03:43 PM, Anup Patel <anup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 05:05:34PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: >>>> The Power State and Coordination Interface (PSCI) specification defines >>>> SYSTEM_OFF and SYSTEM_RESET functions for system poweroff and reboot. >>>> >>>> This patchset adds emulation of PSCI SYSTEM_OFF and SYSTEM_RESET functions >>>> in KVM ARM/ARM64 by forwarding them to user space (QEMU or KVMTOOL) using >>>> KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT exit reason. >>>> >>>> To try this patch from guest kernel, we will need PSCI-based restart and >>>> poweroff support in the guest kenel for both ARM and ARM64. >>>> >>>> Rob Herring has already submitted patches for PSCI-based restart and >>>> poweroff in ARM kernel but these are not merged yet due unstable device >>>> tree bindings of kernel PSCI support. We will be having similar patches >>>> for PSCI-based restart and poweroff in ARM64 kernel. >>>> (Refer http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg262217.html) >>>> (Refer http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg05348.html) >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> I can merge this series if Marc acks it as well. >> >> The patches themselves are mostly fine. One issue though: They implement >> part of the v0.2 spec, but keep on using the range of function IDs that >> we made up for v0.1. >> >> I just had a chat with the person responsible for the spec, and realized >> that the Function IDs mentionned in the v0.2 spec are not optional, and >> not using them would be in direct violation of the spec (the new numbers >> now come directly from the SMC calling convention). > > Should we emulate PSCI_VERSION call to help Guest determine > the spec version emulated by KVM (i.e. v0.1 or v0.2) ?? I think that'd be a nice to have, but the guest is likely to get its information from the DT anyway. Plus I don't think the original PSCI spec specified PSCI_VERSION, which only make it useful for whatever comes after v0.2. So I think we need to: - Use the new range for PSCI v0.2 (while still supporting v0.1 and the old range) - Get the kernel and DT bindings into shape - Merge all of that at the same time Cheers, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm
