On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 03:19:05PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On 1 December 2010 00:25, Russell King - ARM Linux > <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:32:04PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >> Note that I'll go with factoring this out into arch/arm/kernel/smp_scu.c > >> for the time being, but I'm not convinced about the other parts yet. > > > > IOW, something like the attached. I've gone a little further and removed > > the now unnecessary scu_enable() and scu_get_core_count() global functions, > > making scu_enable() static, and eliminating scu_get_core_count() entirely. > > There is some benefit in leaving get_core_count() in the platform > code. For example, the SCU on Cortex-A15 doesn't expose the core count > register and we have to get it from somewhere else (for now from some > L2 cache controller register but in the future it may be hardcoded, > passed via FDT or simply trying to boot maxcpus). I notice that there's no way to tell what revision of SCU is implemented on _any_ mpcore platform. In light of that, I think there's no point what so ever trying to consolidate this code - even the control register bits vary in unpredictable ways between different MPcore implementations. So we can't say "this is a SCU X and this is its register layout." And really, having it undetectable except via DT (which from what I can see, isn't happening any time soon) or via a command line argument isn't acceptable. So I think the idea of consolidating the SCU code is a lost cause. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |