From: Graeme Gregory graeme.gregory@linaro.org
Add documentation for the guidelines of how to use ACPI on ARM64.
Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory graeme.gregory@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo hanjun.guo@linaro.org --- Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt | 215 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 215 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt b/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a6e14a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +ACPI on ARMv8 Servers +--------------------- + +ACPI can be used for ARMv8 general purpose servers designed to follow +the SBSA specification (currently available to people with an ARM login at +http://silver.arm.com). + +The kernel will implement minimum ACPI version is 5.1 + errata as released by +the UEFI Forum, which is available at http://www.uefi.org/acpi/specs. + +If the machine does not meet the requirements of the SBSA, or cannot be +described in the required ACPI specifications then it is likely that Device Tree +(DT) is more suitable for the hardware. + +Relationship with Device Tree +----------------------------- + +ACPI support in drivers and subsystems for ARMv8 should never be mutually +exclusive with DT support at compile time. + +At boot time the kernel will only use one description method depending on +parameters passed from the bootloader (including kernel bootargs). + +Regardless of whether DT or ACPI is used, the kernel must always be capable +of booting with either scheme (in kernels with both schemes enabled at compile +time). + +When booting using ACPI tables the /chosen node in DT will still be parsed +to extract the kernel command line and initrd path. No other section of +the DT will be used. + +Booting using ACPI tables +------------------------- + +Currently, the only defined method to pass ACPI tables to the kernel on ARMv8 +is via the UEFI system configuration table. + +The UEFI implementation MUST set the ACPI_20_TABLE_GUID to point to the +RSDP table (the table with the ACPI signature "RSD PTR "). + +The pointer to the RSDP table will be retrieved from EFI by the ACPI core. + +Processing of ACPI tables may be disabled by passing acpi=off on the kernel +command line. + +DO use an XSDT; RSDTs are deprecated and should not be used on arm64. They +only allow for 32-bit addresses. + +DO NOT use the 32-bit address fields in the FADT; they are deprecated. The +64-bit alternatives MUST be used. + +The minimum set of tables MUST include RSDP, XSDT, FACS, FADT, DSDT, MADT +and GTDT. If PCI is used the MCFG table MUST also be present. + +ACPI Detection +-------------- + +Drivers should determine their probe() type by checking for ACPI_HANDLE, +or .of_node, or other information in the device structure. This is +detailed further in the "Driver Recommendations" section. + +In non-driver code If the presence of ACPI needs to be detected at runtime, +then check the value of acpi_disabled. If CONFIG_ACPI not being set, +acpi_disabled will always be 1. + +Device Enumeration +------------------ + +Device descriptions in ACPI should use standard recognized ACPI interfaces. +These are far simpler than the information provided via Device Tree. Drivers +should take into account this simplicity and work with sensible defaults. + +On no account should a Device Tree attempt to be replicated in ASL using such +constructs as Name(KEY0, "Value1") type constructs. Additional driver specific +data should be passed in the appropriate _DSM (ACPI Section 9.14.1) method or +_DSD (ACPI Section 6.2.5). + +This data should be rare and not OS specific. For x86 ACPI has taken to +identifying itself as Windows because it was found that only one path was +routinely tested. For ARMv8 it would be preferable to have only one well +tested path. + +_DSD covers more than the generic server case and care should be taken not to +replicate highly specific embedded behaviour from DT into generic servers. + +Common _DSD bindings should be submitted to ASWG to be included in the +document :- + +http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-implementation-guide-... + +If these bindings are mirrored from DT care should be taken to ensure they are +reviewed as DT bindings before submission to limit divergance in bindings. + +Programmable Power Control Resources +------------------------------------ + +Programmable power control resources include such resources as voltage/current +providers (regulators) and clock sources. + +For power control of these resources they should be represented with Power +Resource Objects (ACPI Section 7.1). The ACPI core will then handle correctly +enabling/disabling of resources as they are needed. + +The ACPI 5.1 specification does not contain any standard binding for these +objects to enable programmable levels or rates so this should be avoided if +possible and the resources set to appropriate levels by the firmware. If this is +not possible then any manipulation should be abstracted in ASL. + +Each device in ACPI has D-states and these can be controlled through +the optional methods _PS0..._PS3 where _PS0 is full on and _PS3 is full off. + +If either _PS0 or _PS3 is implemented, then the other method must also be +implemented. + +If a device requires usage or setup of a power resource when on, the ASL +should organize that it is allocated/enabled using the _PS0 method. + +Resources allocated/enabled in the _PS0 method should be disabled/de-allocated +in the _PS3 method. + +Such code in _PS? methods will of course be very platform specific but +should allow the driver to operate the device without special non-standard +values being read from ASL. Further, abstracting the use of these resources +allows hardware revisions without requiring updates to the kernel. + +Clocks +------ + +Like clocks that are part of the power resources there is no standard way +to represent a clock tree in ACPI 5.1 in a similar manner to how it is +described in DT. + +Devices affected by this include things like UARTs, SoC driven LCD displays, +etc. + +The firmware (for example, UEFI) should initialize these clocks to fixed working +values before the kernel is executed. + +Driver Recommendations +---------------------- + +DO NOT remove any FDT handling when adding ACPI support for a driver. Different +systems may use the same device. + +DO try and keep complex sections of ACPI and DT functionality separate. This +may mean a patch to break out some complex DT to another function before +the patch to add ACPI. This may happen in other functions but is most likely +in probe function. This gives a clearer flow of data for reviewing driver +source. + +probe() :- + +static int device_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev) +{ + /* DT specific functionality */ + ... +} + +static int device_probe_acpi(struct platform_device *pdev) +{ + /* ACPI specific functionality */ + ... +} + +static int device_probe(stuct platform_device *pdev) +{ + ... + struct device_node node = pdev->dev.of_node; + ... + + if (node) + ret = device_probe_dt(pdev); + else if (ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev)) + ret = device_probe_acpi(pdev); + else + /* other initialization */ + ... + /* Continue with any generic probe operations */ + ... +} + +DO keep the MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE entries together in the driver to make it clear +the different names the driver is probed for, both from DT and from ACPI. + +module device tables :- + +static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = { + { .compatible = "virtio,mmio", }, + { } +}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match); + +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = { + { "LNRO0005", }, + { } +}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match); + +ASWG +---- + +The following areas are not yet well defined for ARM in the current ACPI +specification and are expected to be worked through in the UEFI ACPI +Specification Working Group (ASWG) http://www.uefi.org/workinggroups. +Participation in this group is open to all UEFI members. + + - ACPI based CPU topology + - ACPI based Power management + - CPU idle control based on PSCI + - CPU performance control (CPPC) + +No code shall be accepted into the kernel unless it complies with the released +standards from UEFI ASWG. If there are features missing from ACPI to make it +function on a platform, ECRs should be submitted to ASWG and go through the +approval process.