Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ARM: mach-shmobile: Parse DT to get ARCH timer memory
 region
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
        Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>
References: <1557505377-28577-1-git-send-email-olekstysh@gmail.com>
 <e64d7f2f-209e-cf7d-6ddc-88d338b1c010@arm.com>
 <cc9c5c48-2bc1-be49-4188-8b26dbf7ecc1@gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdWODzaHSeXyB5CgGmq3ZumFGVZYOUT1v1_Ps-RguPLseA@mail.gmail.com>
 <25f5f60e-46ff-18af-2a65-1e3f6719ef49@gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdWkEU7x_Lzk6NUCxEdZRx_xTBFzkETwShZ322aYL5=bLg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Oleksandr <olekstysh@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3e786103-69a4-2867-fc04-ccb4512bf221@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 May 2019 16:58:48 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdWkEU7x_Lzk6NUCxEdZRx_xTBFzkETwShZ322aYL5=bLg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 14.05.19 10:16, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Oleksandr,

Hi Geert


>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:00 PM Oleksandr <olekstysh@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 13.05.19 18:13, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>> So, if the DT bindings for the counter module is not an option (if I
>>>> correctly understood a discussion pointed by Geert in another letter),
>>>> we should probably prevent all timer code here from being executed if
>>>> PSCI is in use.
>>>> What I mean is to return to [2], but with the modification to use
>>>> psci_smp_available() helper as an indicator of PSCI usage.
>>>>
>>>> Julien, Geert, what do you think?
>>> Yes, that sounds good to me.
>>>
>>> Note that psci_smp_available() seems to return false if CONFIG_SMP=n,
>>> so checking for that is not sufficient to avoid crashes when running a
>>> uniprocessor kernel on a PSCI-enabled system.
>> Indeed, you are right.
>>
>>
>> Nothing than just check for psci_ops.cpu_on == NULL directly comes to
>> mind...
>>
>> Have already checked with CONFIG_SMP=n, it works.
>>
>> Sounds ok?
> Fine for me, thanks!

Great, I will send new version.


>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                          Geert
>
-- 
Regards,

Oleksandr Tyshchenko