Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966717AbaFRN1D (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:27:03 -0400 Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.50]:49683 "EHLO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966671AbaFRN1B (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:27:01 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:26:23 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: "msalter@redhat.com" Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: support reboot and power off via EFI runtime Message-ID: <20140618132623.GF26461@leverpostej> References: <1403023514-1352-1-git-send-email-msalter@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1403023514-1352-1-git-send-email-msalter@redhat.com> Thread-Topic: [PATCH] arm64: support reboot and power off via EFI runtime Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Mark, On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 05:45:14PM +0100, Mark Salter wrote: > Add handlers for arm_pm_resestart and pm_power_off which use EFI > runtime services ResetSystem call to perform the functions. These > handlers are only installed if no handler currently exists. This > allows PSCI to take priority over EFI for these functions. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Salter > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c > index 14db1f6..e8c0476 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c > @@ -19,11 +19,14 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > +#include > > #include > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > struct efi_memory_map memmap; > > @@ -467,3 +470,40 @@ static int __init arm64_enter_virtual_mode(void) > return 0; > } > early_initcall(arm64_enter_virtual_mode); > + > +static void efi_restart(enum reboot_mode reboot_mode, const char *cmd) > +{ > + int efi_mode; > + > + switch (reboot_mode) { > + case REBOOT_WARM: > + case REBOOT_SOFT: > + efi_mode = EFI_RESET_WARM; > + break; > + default: > + efi_mode = EFI_RESET_COLD; > + break; > + } > + efi.reset_system(efi_mode, 0, 0, NULL); > +} > + > +static void efi_power_off(void) > +{ > + efi.reset_system(EFI_RESET_SHUTDOWN, 0, 0, NULL); > +} > + > +static int __init setup_efi_reset(void) > +{ > + if (efi_enabled(EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES)) { > + /* > + * If something (psci, etc) hasn't already registered > + * a handler, use EFI. > + */ > + if (arm_pm_restart == NULL) > + arm_pm_restart = efi_restart; > + if (pm_power_off == NULL) > + pm_power_off = efi_power_off; > + } > + return 0; > +} > +pure_initcall(setup_efi_reset); This doesn't seem to match the definition of a pure initcall, given that it depends on the state of EFI runtime services and arm_{pm_restart,power_off}. Is there any reason this needs to run so early? Can this not be called later, when we have more of a guarantee of other reboot / shutdown mechanisms having been registered? Cheers, Mark. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/