Hi York, > >> - /* > >> - * All processors will enter EL2 and optionally EL1. > >> +slave_cpu: > >> + wfe > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_SMP_RELEASE_ALL > >> + /* All cores are released from the address in the 1st spin table > >> + * element > >> */ > >> - bl armv8_switch_to_el2 > >> -#ifdef CONFIG_ARMV8_SWITCH_TO_EL1 > >> - bl armv8_switch_to_el1 > >> + ldr x1, =__spin_table > >> + ldr x0, [x1] > >> +#else > >> + ldr x0, [x11] > >> +#endif > >> + cbz x0, slave_cpu > > > > Similarly is there any reason to have the option of a single release > > addr if we can support unique addresses? > > I think it was used by Linux for some ARM parts. I personally not a fun of > using > single release.
That makes two of us. The single release address on those ARM dts is a legacy mistake that we can't fix up without breaking some models. We don't need to propagate that mistake to new platforms. > But if it makes everyone happy, I can keep it. I'd be happier with CONFIG_FSL_SMP_RELEASE_ALL dropped entirely. Ideally U-Boot would always provide a unique cpu-release-address for each CPU. Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
