On 06/11/2014 08:35 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > Hi Chanwoo, > > On 11.06.2014 01:27, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >> This patch set AUTOWAKEUP_EN bit to ARM_CORE_CONFIGURATION register >> because Exynos3250 removes WFE in secure mode so that turn on automatically >> after setting CORE_LOCAL_PWR_EN. Also, This patch use dbs_sev() macro >> to guarantee the data synchronization of command instead of IPI_WAKEUP >> because Exynos3250 don't have WFE mode in secue mode. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Acked-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 9 ++++++++- >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c | 8 ++++++-- >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/regs-pmu.h | 4 ++++ >> 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> > > This patch seems to be unneeded with Krzysztof's patch send a while ago > [1]. As reported by Krzysztof, that patch apparently fixes SMP support > on Exynos3250 and is much smaller and less invasive. > > [1] - http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.samsung-soc/32809 OK, But Krzysztof's patch didn't include set S5P_CORE_AUTOWAKEUP_EN in EXYNOS_ARM_CORE_CONFIGURATION(cpu). and then use arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(cpumask_of(cpu)) command instead of dsb_sev(). Exynos3250 don't need send IPI message. I'll send next patch which include only S5P_CORE_AUTOWAKEUP_EN and without sending IPI message. Krzysztof's patch used of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos3250") instead of soc_is_exynos3250(). Did you agree? If you agree to use of_machine_is_compatible(), I'll use it on next patch(v2). Best Regards, Chanwoo Choi -- 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
 |