On Friday 07 April 2017 01:15 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> To remove dependency on soc_is_exynosMMMM macros and remove multiple
>> checks for such macros, let's refactor code in firmware.c file.
>> SoC specific firmware_ops are separated and registered during
>> exynos_firmware_init based on matching machine compatible.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 114 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>> 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> index e81a78b..b04c47a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> @@ -35,6 +35,25 @@ static void exynos_save_cp15(void)
>> : : "cc");
>> }
>>
>> +static int exynos3250_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>> +{
>> + switch (mode) {
>> + case FW_DO_IDLE_AFTR:
>> + writel_relaxed(virt_to_phys(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
>> + sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
>> + writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
>> + flush_cache_all();
>> + exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
>> + SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> + exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
>> + SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> + break;
>> + case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
>> + exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
>> + }
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>> {
>> switch (mode) {
>> @@ -44,14 +63,7 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>> writel_relaxed(__pa_symbol(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
>> sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
>> writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
>> - if (soc_is_exynos3250()) {
>> - flush_cache_all();
>> - exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
>> - SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> - exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
>> - SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> - } else
>> - exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
>> + exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
>> break;
>> case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
>> exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
>> @@ -59,28 +71,25 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> -static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
>> +static int exynos4212_cpu_boot(int cpu)
>> {
>> /*
>> - * Exynos3250 doesn't need to send smc command for secondary CPU boot
>> - * because Exynos3250 removes WFE in secure mode.
>> - */
>> - if (soc_is_exynos3250())
>> - return 0;
>> -
>> - /*
>> * The second parameter of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command means CPU id.
>> * But, Exynos4212 has only one secondary CPU so second parameter
>> * isn't used for informing secure firmware about CPU id.
>> */
>> - if (soc_is_exynos4212())
>> - cpu = 0;
>> + cpu = 0;
>
> The comment above is clear enough so I think there is no need for this
> assignment. Just use 0 as argument in exynos_smc().
>
Ok, will modify accordingly in next patchset.
> Rest looks good so with this change:
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
Thanks for review,
Pankaj Dubey
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
>
>
--
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
