Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] arm64: dts: actions: Fix smp Bringing up secondary
 CPUs
To:     =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=c3=a4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc:     manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-actions@lists.infradead.org
References: <20200705191944.404933-1-matheus@castello.eng.br>
 <60c25ef8-761d-9108-a8b1-ea15678c496c@suse.de>
From:   Matheus Castello <matheus@castello.eng.br>
Message-ID: <24c87b5b-d378-bcfa-d557-0dcba5199c1b@castello.eng.br>
Date:   Sun, 5 Jul 2020 19:42:06 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <60c25ef8-761d-9108-a8b1-ea15678c496c@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: pt-BR
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Andreas,

Em 7/5/20 7:09 PM, Andreas Färber escreveu:
> Hi Matheus,
> 
> Am 05.07.20 um 21:19 schrieb Matheus Castello:
>> Change the enable-method to fix the failed to boot errors:
>>
>> [    0.040330] smp: Bringing up secondary CPUs ...
>> [    0.040683] psci: failed to boot CPU1 (-22)
>> [    0.040691] CPU1: failed to boot: -22
>> [    0.041062] psci: failed to boot CPU2 (-22)
>> [    0.041071] CPU2: failed to boot: -22
>> [    0.041408] psci: failed to boot CPU3 (-22)
>> [    0.041417] CPU3: failed to boot: -22
>> [    0.041443] smp: Brought up 1 node, 1 CPU
>> [    0.041451] SMP: Total of 1 processors activated.
>>
>> Tested on Caninos Labrador v3 based on Actions Semi S700.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matheus Castello <matheus@castello.eng.br>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/actions/s700.dtsi | 33 +++++++++++++++++++--------
>>   1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> NACK.
> 
> For starters, if this were an actual fix, it should have a Fixes header.
> 
> Don't do random changes in a single patch and call it a "fix". I don't 
> see what changing the cell size has to do with smp, nor adding L2 cache. 
> The latter could be a patch of its own, after fixes are applied (to 
> avoid conflicts when backporting that fix to older branches). A cell 
> size of two used to be perfectly valid, please checking the DT binding.
>  > Finally, you're changing generic S700 code here - you can't just break
> Cubieboard7 just because your Labrador has too old BL31 firmware. Can't 

Sorry for that, got it.

> you just update its TF-A firmware and use the standard PSCI interface 
> for Linux? If not, then you should add your workaround to your 
> module's/board's .dts(i) instead of the SoC's .dtsi.
> 

Yes, the vendor does not seem to support this for now. I think for now 
the best thing to do is to leave the workaround on the module's .dtsi.
Thank you for the tips.

> Thanks,
> Andreas
> 

BR,
Matheus Castello