On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 05:49:59PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 01:49:03PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote: > > And because Linux kernel is running on Non-secure EL1, so should we > > skip "SECURE" timer in Linux? > > I guess you mean by checking the GTx Common flags, to see if the timer > is secure? Yes, we must skip those. > > Looking further at this, the ACPI spec is sorely lacking any statement > as to the configuration of CNTCTLBase.{CNTSAR,CNTTIDR,CNTACR}, so it's > not clear if we can access anything in a frame, even if it is listed as > being a non-secure timer. Given CNTNSAR.NS<n> enables non-secure access to CNTACR<n>, I guess the obvious interpretation is that for frames listed as non-secure, this has been configured to permit non-secure access to the frame and associated CNTACR<n>. I will work to that assumption while reviewing, though I still believe this needs to be clarified in the spec. Thanks, Mark. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html