On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday 26 March 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > They can even base the implementation of their smp_ops on the current
> > > > psci code, in order to facilitate that I could get rid of psci_ops
> > > >
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 March 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > They can even base the implementation of their smp_ops on the current
> > > psci code, in order to facilitate that I could get rid of psci_ops
> > > (which initialization is based on device tree) and exp
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 03:25:55PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 02:41:15PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > +struct smp_operations __initdata psci_smp_ops = {
> > > > +
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 March 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > They can even base the implementation of their smp_ops on the current
> > > psci code, in order to facilitate that I could get rid of psci_ops
> > > (which initialization is based on device tree) and expo
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 03:25:55PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 02:41:15PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > +struct smp_operations __initdata psci_smp_ops = {
> > > > +
On Tuesday 26 March 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > They can even base the implementation of their smp_ops on the current
> > psci code, in order to facilitate that I could get rid of psci_ops
> > (which initialization is based on device tree) and export the psci_cpu_*
> > functions instead, so that t
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 03:25:55PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 02:41:15PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > +struct smp_operations __initdata psci_smp_ops = {
> > > + .smp_init_cpus = psci_smp_init_cpus,
> > >
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 02:41:15PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Check for the presence of PSCI before setting smp_ops, use PSCI if it is
> > available.
> >
> > This is useful because at least when running on Xen it's possible to ha
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 March 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Check for the presence of PSCI before setting smp_ops, use PSCI if it is
> > available.
> >
> > This is useful because at least when running on Xen it's possible to have a
> > PSCI node for example
Hi Stefano,
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 02:41:15PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Check for the presence of PSCI before setting smp_ops, use PSCI if it is
> available.
>
> This is useful because at least when running on Xen it's possible to have a
> PSCI node for example on a Versatile Express or
On Tuesday 26 March 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Check for the presence of PSCI before setting smp_ops, use PSCI if it is
> available.
>
> This is useful because at least when running on Xen it's possible to have a
> PSCI node for example on a Versatile Express or an Exynos5 machine. In these
11 matches
Mail list logo