[v5,11/13] ARM: sun9i: smp: Add is_sun9i field

Message ID 20180403061836.3926-12-mylene.josserand@bootlin.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • Sunxi: Add SMP support on A83T
Related show

Commit Message

Mylène Josserand April 3, 2018, 6:18 a.m.
To prepare the support of sun8i-a83t, add a field in the smp_data
structure to enable the case of sun9i.

Start to handle the differences between sun9i-a80 and sun8i-a83t
by using this variable.
Add an index to retrieve which structures we are using.

Signed-off-by: Mylène Josserand <mylene.josserand@bootlin.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-sunxi/mc_smp.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Comments

Maxime Ripard April 3, 2018, 8:46 a.m. | #1
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 08:18:34AM +0200, Mylène Josserand wrote:
> To prepare the support of sun8i-a83t, add a field in the smp_data
> structure to enable the case of sun9i.
> 
> Start to handle the differences between sun9i-a80 and sun8i-a83t
> by using this variable.
>
> Add an index to retrieve which structures we are using.

This should have been in a separate commit, but maybe we can store a
pointer to the array cell we're using instead of always using the
index?

Maxime
Chen-Yu Tsai April 3, 2018, 8:48 a.m. | #2
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 08:18:34AM +0200, Mylène Josserand wrote:
>> To prepare the support of sun8i-a83t, add a field in the smp_data
>> structure to enable the case of sun9i.
>>
>> Start to handle the differences between sun9i-a80 and sun8i-a83t
>> by using this variable.
>>
>> Add an index to retrieve which structures we are using.
>
> This should have been in a separate commit, but maybe we can store a
> pointer to the array cell we're using instead of always using the
> index?

Using a pointer would also avoid some of the code movement from the
previous patch.

ChenYu
Mylène Josserand April 3, 2018, 8:08 p.m. | #3
Hi,

On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 16:48:41 +0800
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 08:18:34AM +0200, Mylène Josserand wrote:  
> >> To prepare the support of sun8i-a83t, add a field in the smp_data
> >> structure to enable the case of sun9i.
> >>
> >> Start to handle the differences between sun9i-a80 and sun8i-a83t
> >> by using this variable.
> >>
> >> Add an index to retrieve which structures we are using.  
> >
> > This should have been in a separate commit, but maybe we can store a
> > pointer to the array cell we're using instead of always using the
> > index?  
> 
> Using a pointer would also avoid some of the code movement from the
> previous patch.
> 
> ChenYu

Yep, I will use a pointer instead. Thanks for the correction.

Best regards,

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/mc_smp.c b/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/mc_smp.c
index 0a7252df207f..468a6c46bfc9 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/mc_smp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/mc_smp.c
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ 
 static void __iomem *cpucfg_base;
 static void __iomem *prcm_base;
 static void __iomem *sram_b_smp_base;
+static int index;
 
 /*
  * This holds any device nodes that we requested resources for,
@@ -86,6 +87,7 @@  struct sunxi_mc_smp_nodes {
 struct sunxi_mc_smp_data {
 	const char *enable_method;
 	int (*get_smp_nodes)(struct sunxi_mc_smp_nodes *nodes);
+	int is_sun9i;
 };
 
 extern void sunxi_mc_smp_secondary_startup(void);
@@ -97,6 +99,7 @@  static const struct sunxi_mc_smp_data sunxi_mc_smp_data[] __initconst = {
 	{
 		.enable_method	= "allwinner,sun9i-a80-smp",
 		.get_smp_nodes	= sun9i_a80_get_smp_nodes,
+		.is_sun9i	= true,
 	},
 };
 
@@ -280,7 +283,8 @@  static int sunxi_cluster_powerup(unsigned int cluster)
 
 	/* clear cluster power gate */
 	reg = readl(prcm_base + PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG(cluster));
-	reg &= ~PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG_CLUSTER_SUN9I;
+	if (sunxi_mc_smp_data[index].is_sun9i)
+		reg &= ~PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG_CLUSTER_SUN9I;
 	writel(reg, prcm_base + PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG(cluster));
 	udelay(20);
 
@@ -477,7 +481,8 @@  static int sunxi_cluster_powerdown(unsigned int cluster)
 	/* gate cluster power */
 	pr_debug("%s: gate cluster power\n", __func__);
 	reg = readl(prcm_base + PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG(cluster));
-	reg |= PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG_CLUSTER_SUN9I;
+	if (sunxi_mc_smp_data[index].is_sun9i)
+		reg |= PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG_CLUSTER_SUN9I;
 	writel(reg, prcm_base + PRCM_PWROFF_GATING_REG(cluster));
 	udelay(20);
 
@@ -675,6 +680,7 @@  static int __init sunxi_mc_smp_init(void)
 	struct device_node *node;
 	struct resource res;
 	int i, ret;
+	void __iomem *addr;
 
 	/*
 	 * Don't bother checking the "cpus" node, as an enable-method
@@ -699,6 +705,8 @@  static int __init sunxi_mc_smp_init(void)
 			break;
 	}
 
+	index = i;
+
 	of_node_put(node);
 	if (ret)
 		return -ENODEV;
@@ -736,12 +744,14 @@  static int __init sunxi_mc_smp_init(void)
 		goto err_unmap_prcm;
 	}
 
-	sram_b_smp_base = of_io_request_and_map(nodes.sram_node, 0,
-						"sunxi-mc-smp");
-	if (IS_ERR(sram_b_smp_base)) {
-		ret = PTR_ERR(sram_b_smp_base);
-		pr_err("%s: failed to map secure SRAM\n", __func__);
-		goto err_unmap_release_cpucfg;
+	if (sunxi_mc_smp_data[index].is_sun9i) {
+		sram_b_smp_base = of_io_request_and_map(nodes.sram_node, 0,
+							"sunxi-mc-smp");
+		if (IS_ERR(sram_b_smp_base)) {
+			ret = PTR_ERR(sram_b_smp_base);
+			pr_err("%s: failed to map secure SRAM\n", __func__);
+			goto err_unmap_release_cpucfg;
+		}
 	}
 
 	/* Configure CCI-400 for boot cluster */
@@ -756,8 +766,9 @@  static int __init sunxi_mc_smp_init(void)
 	sunxi_mc_smp_put_nodes(&nodes);
 
 	/* Set the hardware entry point address */
-	writel(__pa_symbol(sunxi_mc_smp_secondary_startup),
-	       prcm_base + PRCM_CPU_SOFT_ENTRY_REG);
+	if (sunxi_mc_smp_data[index].is_sun9i)
+		addr = prcm_base + PRCM_CPU_SOFT_ENTRY_REG;
+	writel(__pa_symbol(sunxi_mc_smp_secondary_startup), addr);
 
 	/* Actually enable multi cluster SMP */
 	smp_set_ops(&sunxi_mc_smp_smp_ops);
@@ -767,8 +778,10 @@  static int __init sunxi_mc_smp_init(void)
 	return 0;
 
 err_unmap_release_secure_sram:
-	iounmap(sram_b_smp_base);
-	of_address_to_resource(nodes.sram_node, 0, &res);
+	if (sunxi_mc_smp_data[index].is_sun9i) {
+		iounmap(sram_b_smp_base);
+		of_address_to_resource(nodes.sram_node, 0, &res);
+	}
 	release_mem_region(res.start, resource_size(&res));
 err_unmap_release_cpucfg:
 	iounmap(cpucfg_base);