Hi Marc,
On 26 October 2016 at 20:11, Marc Zyngier marc.zyngier@arm.com wrote:
On 26/10/16 12:10, Fu Wei wrote:
Hi Mark,
On 21 October 2016 at 00:37, Mark Rutland mark.rutland@arm.com wrote:
Hi,
As a heads-up, on v4.9-rc1 I see conflicts at least against arch/arm64/Kconfig. Luckily git am -3 seems to be able to fix that up automatically, but this will need to be rebased before the next posting and/or merging.
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 02:17:12AM +0800, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
+static int __init map_gt_gsi(u32 interrupt, u32 flags) +{
int trigger, polarity;
if (!interrupt)
return 0;
Urgh.
Only the secure interrupt (which we do not need) is optional in this manner, and (hilariously), zero appears to also be a valid GSIV, per figure 5-24 in the ACPI 6.1 spec.
So, I think that:
(a) we should not bother parsing the secure interrupt
If I understand correctly, from this point of view, kernel don't handle the secure interrupt. But the current arm_arch_timer driver still enable/disable/request PHYS_SECURE_PPI with PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI. That means we still need to parse the secure interrupt. Please correct me, if I misunderstand something? :-)
That's because we can use the per-cpu timer when 32bit Linux is running on the secure side (and we cannot distinguish between secure and non-secure at runtime). ACPI is 64bit only, and Linux on 64bit isn't supported on the secure side, so only registering the non-secure timer is perfectly acceptable.
Great thanks for your explanation :-) So we just don't need to fill arch_timer_ppi[PHYS_SECURE_PPI] , just skip it.
Thanks,
M.
-- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...