Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: Add a binding for the sunxi message box

Hi Samuel, thank you very much for writing and posting this! On 28/02/18 08:28, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 08:27:12PM -0600, Samuel Holland wrote: >> This mailbox hardware is present in several Allwinner sun8i and sun50i >> SoCs. Add a device tree binding for it. >>

Re: [PATCH 2/3] mailbox: Avoid NULL dereference in mbox_chan_received_data

Hi, On 28/02/18 02:27, Samuel Holland wrote: > If a reception IRQ is pending when a mailbox channel is shut down (for > example, if the controller uses threaded interrupts), it is possible for > mbox_chan_received_data to be called while chan->cl is NULL. > > This was found while developing a

Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: Add a binding for the sunxi message box

Hi Samuel, thank you very much for writing and posting this! On 28/02/18 08:28, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 08:27:12PM -0600, Samuel Holland wrote: >> This mailbox hardware is present in several Allwinner sun8i and sun50i >> SoCs. Add a device tree binding for it. >>

Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64: allwinner: h6: add the basical Allwinner H6 DTSI file

Hi, On 26/02/18 15:54, Samuel Holland wrote: > On 02/26/18 03:26, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 11:22:06PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > + psci { > + compatible = "arm,psci-0.2"; > + method = "smc"; > + }; Is it needed? The bootloader

Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64: allwinner: h6: add the basical Allwinner H6 DTSI file

Hi, On 26/02/18 15:54, Samuel Holland wrote: > On 02/26/18 03:26, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 11:22:06PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > + psci { > + compatible = "arm,psci-0.2"; > + method = "smc"; > + }; Is it needed? The bootloader

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 11/01/18 10:41, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:23:52AM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 11/01/18 10:14, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:08 PM, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> >>> wrote:

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 11/01/18 10:41, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:23:52AM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 11/01/18 10:14, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:08 PM, Andre Przywara >>> wrote: >>>> H

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, another take to avoid this patch at all, I just remembered this from an IRC discussion before: On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one) > have no bus gate clocks. I don't think this is true. The pin controller *needs* an

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, another take to avoid this patch at all, I just remembered this from an IRC discussion before: On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one) > have no bus gate clocks. I don't think this is true. The pin controller *needs* an

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 11/01/18 10:15, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 于 2018年1月11日 GMT+08:00 下午6:08:19, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> 写到: >> Hi, >> >> On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 11/01/18 10:15, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 于 2018年1月11日 GMT+08:00 下午6:08:19, Andre Przywara 写到: >> Hi, >> >> On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one) >>> have no bus g

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 11/01/18 10:14, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:08 PM, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one) &

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 11/01/18 10:14, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:08 PM, Andre Przywara > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one) >>> have no bus gate

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one) > have no bus gate clocks. > > Add support for this kind of pin controllers. > > Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng > --- > drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c | 30

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/7] pinctrl: sunxi: add support for pin controllers without bus gate

Hi, On 06/01/18 04:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > The Allwinner H6 pin controllers (both the main one and the CPUs one) > have no bus gate clocks. > > Add support for this kind of pin controllers. > > Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng > --- > drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c | 30

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] reset: socfpga: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 18/10/17 14:50, Philipp Zabel wrote: > On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 14:00 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, > > Thank you for the review. > >> On 17/10/17 14:03, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>> Add reset line status readback, inverted status support, and socfpga >

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] reset: socfpga: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 18/10/17 14:50, Philipp Zabel wrote: > On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 14:00 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, > > Thank you for the review. > >> On 17/10/17 14:03, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>> Add reset line status readback, inverted status support, and socfpga >

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] reset: socfpga: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 17/10/17 14:03, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Add reset line status readback, inverted status support, and socfpga > device tree quirks to the simple reset driver, and use it to replace > the socfpga driver. > > Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel > --- > Changes since v3: > -

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] reset: socfpga: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 17/10/17 14:03, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Add reset line status readback, inverted status support, and socfpga > device tree quirks to the simple reset driver, and use it to replace > the socfpga driver. > > Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel > --- > Changes since v3: > - Rebased onto reset/next

Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Check GITS_CBASER validity before processing commands

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > At the moment vgic_its_process_commands() does not > check the CBASER is valid before processing any command. > Let's fix that. Good catch, but actually it goes a bit further: "When GITS_CTLR.Enabled is written from 0 to 1 behavior is UNPREDICTABLE if

Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Check GITS_CBASER validity before processing commands

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > At the moment vgic_its_process_commands() does not > check the CBASER is valid before processing any command. > Let's fix that. Good catch, but actually it goes a bit further: "When GITS_CTLR.Enabled is written from 0 to 1 behavior is UNPREDICTABLE if

Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Always attempt to save/restore device and collection tables

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > In case the device table save fails, we currently do not > attempt to save the collection table. However it may > happen that the device table fails because the structures > in memory are inconsistent with device GITS_BASER however > this does not mean

Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Always attempt to save/restore device and collection tables

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > In case the device table save fails, we currently do not > attempt to save the collection table. However it may > happen that the device table fails because the structures > in memory are inconsistent with device GITS_BASER however > this does not mean

Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Always allow clearing GITS_CREADR/CWRITER

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > If the GITS_CBASER Size field is 0, which can correspond to a > reset value, the userspace fails to set the GITS_CREADR/CWRITER > offsets to 0. This failure is not justified. > > Let's allow this setting which can also correspond to a reset value. But

Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Improve error reporting on device table save

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > At the moment the device table save() returns -EINVAL if > vgic_its_check_id() fails to return the gpa of the entry > associated to the device/collection id. Let vgic_its_check_id() > return an int instead of a bool and return a more precised > error

Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Check GITS_BASER Valid bit before saving tables

hat: > Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> Cheers, Andre. > --- > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 20 +++- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm

Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Always allow clearing GITS_CREADR/CWRITER

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > If the GITS_CBASER Size field is 0, which can correspond to a > reset value, the userspace fails to set the GITS_CREADR/CWRITER > offsets to 0. This failure is not justified. > > Let's allow this setting which can also correspond to a reset value. But

Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Improve error reporting on device table save

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > At the moment the device table save() returns -EINVAL if > vgic_its_check_id() fails to return the gpa of the entry > associated to the device/collection id. Let vgic_its_check_id() > return an int instead of a bool and return a more precised > error

Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: Check GITS_BASER Valid bit before saving tables

hat: > Signed-off-by: Eric Auger Reviewed-by: Andre Przywara Cheers, Andre. > --- > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 20 +++- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c > index

Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: fix return value for restore

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > From: wanghaibin > > This patch fix the migrate restore tables failure. > > The same scene, at the destination, the restore tables > interface traversal guest memory, and check the dte/ite > is valid or not. If all

Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-its: fix return value for restore

Hi, On 27/09/17 14:28, Eric Auger wrote: > From: wanghaibin > > This patch fix the migrate restore tables failure. > > The same scene, at the destination, the restore tables > interface traversal guest memory, and check the dte/ite > is valid or not. If all dtes/ites are invalid, we will do >

Re: [PATCH 3/3] dmaengine: sun6i: Add support for Allwinner A64

Hi Maxime, On 08/09/17 15:39, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 09:14:52AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: >>> And obviously, while maintaining the stability of the binding of those >>> hundreds properties. >>> >>> Or, you can base all this on the compatible, and be done with

Re: [PATCH 3/3] dmaengine: sun6i: Add support for Allwinner A64

Hi Maxime, On 08/09/17 15:39, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 09:14:52AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: >>> And obviously, while maintaining the stability of the binding of those >>> hundreds properties. >>> >>> Or, you can base all this on the compatible, and be done with

Re: [PATCH 3/3] dmaengine: sun6i: Add support for Allwinner A64

Hi, On 31/08/17 00:36, Stefan Brüns wrote: > The A64 SoC has the same dma engine as the H3 (sun8i), with a > reduced amount of physical channels. Add the proper config data > and compatible string to support it. ... > diff --git a/drivers/dma/sun6i-dma.c b/drivers/dma/sun6i-dma.c > index

Re: [PATCH 3/3] dmaengine: sun6i: Add support for Allwinner A64

Hi, On 31/08/17 00:36, Stefan Brüns wrote: > The A64 SoC has the same dma engine as the H3 (sun8i), with a > reduced amount of physical channels. Add the proper config data > and compatible string to support it. ... > diff --git a/drivers/dma/sun6i-dma.c b/drivers/dma/sun6i-dma.c > index

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] mailbox: arm: introduce smc triggered mailbox

Hi, (sorry for the delay, cleaning up my inbox after holidays) On 01/08/17 11:50, Alexander Graf wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 24.07.17 01:23, Andre Przywara wrote: >> This is a reworked version of my previous post. It addresses Jassi's >> comments on the driver and also

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] mailbox: arm: introduce smc triggered mailbox

Hi, (sorry for the delay, cleaning up my inbox after holidays) On 01/08/17 11:50, Alexander Graf wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 24.07.17 01:23, Andre Przywara wrote: >> This is a reworked version of my previous post. It addresses Jassi's >> comments on the driver and also

Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] reset: stm32: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 16/08/17 21:55, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote: > > > On 08/16/2017 01:52 PM, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Am 16.08.2017 um 22:50 schrieb Alexandru Gagniuc: >>> On 08/16/2017 02:46 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote: The reset-simple driver can be used without changes. Signed-off-by: Philipp

Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] reset: stm32: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 16/08/17 21:55, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote: > > > On 08/16/2017 01:52 PM, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Am 16.08.2017 um 22:50 schrieb Alexandru Gagniuc: >>> On 08/16/2017 02:46 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote: The reset-simple driver can be used without changes. Signed-off-by: Philipp

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] reset: add reset-simple to unify socfpga, stm32, sunxi, and zx2967

Hi, On 16/08/17 17:41, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 16.08.2017 um 17:11 schrieb Philipp Zabel: >> On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 14:12 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: >>> Am 16.08.2017 um 13:30 schrieb Andre Przywara: >>>> On 16/08/17 10:46, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>>>&g

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] reset: add reset-simple to unify socfpga, stm32, sunxi, and zx2967

Hi, On 16/08/17 17:41, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 16.08.2017 um 17:11 schrieb Philipp Zabel: >> On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 14:12 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: >>> Am 16.08.2017 um 13:30 schrieb Andre Przywara: >>>> On 16/08/17 10:46, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>>>&g

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] reset: add reset-simple to unify socfpga, stm32, sunxi, and zx2967

Hi, On 16/08/17 16:11, Philipp Zabel wrote: > On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 14:12 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Hi Andre, >> >> Am 16.08.2017 um 13:30 schrieb Andre Przywara: >>> On 16/08/17 10:46, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>>> +/** >>>> + * struct res

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] reset: add reset-simple to unify socfpga, stm32, sunxi, and zx2967

Hi, On 16/08/17 16:11, Philipp Zabel wrote: > On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 14:12 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Hi Andre, >> >> Am 16.08.2017 um 13:30 schrieb Andre Przywara: >>> On 16/08/17 10:46, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>>> +/** >>>> + * struct res

Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] reset: stm32: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 16/08/17 13:52, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote: > Hi Philipp, > > On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 11:46 +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: >> The reset-simple driver can be used without changes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel >> [snip] >> >> --- a/drivers/reset/reset-simple.c >> +++

Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] reset: stm32: use the reset-simple driver

Hi, On 16/08/17 13:52, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote: > Hi Philipp, > > On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 11:46 +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: >> The reset-simple driver can be used without changes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel >> [snip] >> >> --- a/drivers/reset/reset-simple.c >> +++

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] reset: add reset-simple to unify socfpga, stm32, sunxi, and zx2967

Hi Philipp, sorry for the delay, I was on holidays. Thanks for putting together the series, this looks very good to me. One comment below... On 16/08/17 10:46, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Split reusable parts out of the sunxi driver, to add a driver for simple > reset controllers with reset lines

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] reset: add reset-simple to unify socfpga, stm32, sunxi, and zx2967

Hi Philipp, sorry for the delay, I was on holidays. Thanks for putting together the series, this looks very good to me. One comment below... On 16/08/17 10:46, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Split reusable parts out of the sunxi driver, to add a driver for simple > reset controllers with reset lines

[PATCH v2 1/3] DT: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox

The ARM SMC mailbox binding describes a firmware interface to trigger actions in software layers running in the EL2 or EL3 exception levels. The term "ARM" here relates to the SMC instruction as part of the ARM instruction set, not as a standard endorsed by ARM Ltd. Signed-off-by: Andr

[PATCH v2 1/3] DT: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox

The ARM SMC mailbox binding describes a firmware interface to trigger actions in software layers running in the EL2 or EL3 exception levels. The term "ARM" here relates to the SMC instruction as part of the ARM instruction set, not as a standard endorsed by ARM Ltd. Signed-off-by: Andr

[PATCH v2 2/3] mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox

is not implemented. This allows the usage of a mailbox to trigger firmware actions on SoCs which either don't have a separate management processor or on which such a core is not available. A user of this mailbox could be the SCP interface. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> --- d

[PATCH v2 2/3] mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox

is not implemented. This allows the usage of a mailbox to trigger firmware actions on SoCs which either don't have a separate management processor or on which such a core is not available. A user of this mailbox could be the SCP interface. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- drivers/mailbox/Kconfig

[PATCH v2 3/3] mailbox: Kconfig: enable ARM SMC mailbox on 64-bit Allwinner SoCs

For 64-bit Allwinner SoCs there exist firmware implementations which provide SCPI controlled handlers for DVFS, sensors and power domains. To allow usage of this features, enable the required SMC mailbox when Allwinner SoCs are supported by the kernel. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.pr

[PATCH v2 3/3] mailbox: Kconfig: enable ARM SMC mailbox on 64-bit Allwinner SoCs

For 64-bit Allwinner SoCs there exist firmware implementations which provide SCPI controlled handlers for DVFS, sensors and power domains. To allow usage of this features, enable the required SMC mailbox when Allwinner SoCs are supported by the kernel. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- drivers

[PATCH v2 0/3] mailbox: arm: introduce smc triggered mailbox

[1] https://github.com/apritzel/arm-trusted-firmware/commits/allwinner-scpi-wip Andre Przywara (3): DT: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox mailbox: Kconfig: enable ARM SMC mailbox on 64-bit Allwinner SoCs .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/a

[PATCH v2 0/3] mailbox: arm: introduce smc triggered mailbox

[1] https://github.com/apritzel/arm-trusted-firmware/commits/allwinner-scpi-wip Andre Przywara (3): DT: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox mailbox: Kconfig: enable ARM SMC mailbox on 64-bit Allwinner SoCs .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/a

Re: [PATCH 2/8] dt-bindings: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox

Hi, On 07/07/17 15:35, Mark Rutland wrote: > Hi Andre, > > As a nit, please post bindings before drivers, as per > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt. Sure. > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:56:02AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Add binding documentatio

Re: [PATCH 2/8] dt-bindings: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox

Hi, On 07/07/17 15:35, Mark Rutland wrote: > Hi Andre, > > As a nit, please post bindings before drivers, as per > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt. Sure. > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:56:02AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Add binding documentatio

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v4 5/6] ARM: sun7i: Convert to CCU

Hi, On 29/06/17 12:49, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:57:05AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 25/06/17 21:45, Priit Laes wrote: >>> Convert sun7i-a20.dtsi to new CCU driver. >> >> I know that some people hat^Wget annoyed b

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v4 5/6] ARM: sun7i: Convert to CCU

Hi, On 29/06/17 12:49, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:57:05AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 25/06/17 21:45, Priit Laes wrote: >>> Convert sun7i-a20.dtsi to new CCU driver. >> >> I know that some people hat^Wget annoyed b

Re: [PATCH 0/8] mailbox: arm/arm64: introduce smc triggered mailbox

Hi, thanks for having a look! On 30/06/17 13:25, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:56:00AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The remaining patches demonstrate usage of this feature to drive SCPI >> services >> implemented as part of the ARM Trus

Re: [PATCH 0/8] mailbox: arm/arm64: introduce smc triggered mailbox

Hi, thanks for having a look! On 30/06/17 13:25, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:56:00AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The remaining patches demonstrate usage of this feature to drive SCPI >> services >> implemented as part of the ARM Trus

[PATCH 0/8] mailbox: arm/arm64: introduce smc triggered mailbox

to signal a mailbox condition to firmware or a hypervisor. Please have a look and comment whether this sounds like a useful addition to the kernel. Cheers, Andre. [1] https://github.com/apritzel/arm-trusted-firmware/commits/allwinner-scpi-wip Andre Przywara (8): mailbox: introduce ARM SMC bas

[PATCH 0/8] mailbox: arm/arm64: introduce smc triggered mailbox

to signal a mailbox condition to firmware or a hypervisor. Please have a look and comment whether this sounds like a useful addition to the kernel. Cheers, Andre. [1] https://github.com/apritzel/arm-trusted-firmware/commits/allwinner-scpi-wip Andre Przywara (8): mailbox: introduce ARM SMC bas

[PATCH 2/8] dt-bindings: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox

Add binding documentation for the generic ARM SMC mailbox. This is not describing hardware, but a firmware interface. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> --- .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-smc.txt| 61 ++ 1 file changed, 61 inse

[PATCH 2/8] dt-bindings: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox

Add binding documentation for the generic ARM SMC mailbox. This is not describing hardware, but a firmware interface. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-smc.txt| 61 ++ 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+) create mode 100644

[PATCH 1/8] mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox

is not implemented. This allows the usage of a mailbox to trigger firmware actions on SoCs which either don't have a separate management processor or on which such a core is not available. A user of this mailbox could be the SCP interface. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> --- d

[PATCH 1/8] mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox

is not implemented. This allows the usage of a mailbox to trigger firmware actions on SoCs which either don't have a separate management processor or on which such a core is not available. A user of this mailbox could be the SCP interface. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- drivers/mailbox/Kconfig

[PATCH 8/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add (unused) MMC clock node

in the kernel. The number here is made explicitly compatible with the in-kernel CCF numbering, so any consumer can be switched over by just exchaning the phandle. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 9 + 1 file chan

[PATCH 8/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add (unused) MMC clock node

in the kernel. The number here is made explicitly compatible with the in-kernel CCF numbering, so any consumer can be switched over by just exchaning the phandle. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 9 + 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git

[PATCH 5/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI DVFS nodes

calls. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 15 +++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi index ef6f10e..5

[PATCH 5/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI DVFS nodes

calls. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 15 +++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi index ef6f10e..58c3675 100644 --- a/arch/arm64

[PATCH 6/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI sensors support

a clock to be running, we set a fixed clock rate for this particular clock to prevent the Linux driver from turning it off. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 7 +++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm6

[PATCH 6/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI sensors support

a clock to be running, we set a fixed clock rate for this particular clock to prevent the Linux driver from turning it off. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 7 +++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i

[PATCH 3/8] mailbox: Kconfig: enable ARM SMC mailbox on 64-bit Allwinner SoCs

For 64-bit Allwinner SoCs there exist firmware implementations which provide SCPI controlled handlers for DVFS, sensors and power domains. To allow usage of this features, enable the required SMC mailbox when Allwinner SoCs are supported by the kernel. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.pr

[PATCH 3/8] mailbox: Kconfig: enable ARM SMC mailbox on 64-bit Allwinner SoCs

For 64-bit Allwinner SoCs there exist firmware implementations which provide SCPI controlled handlers for DVFS, sensors and power domains. To allow usage of this features, enable the required SMC mailbox when Allwinner SoCs are supported by the kernel. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- drivers

[PATCH 4/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI support

This adds support for the SCPI protocol using an SMC mailbox and some shared memory in SRAM. The SCPI provider is implemented in the ARM Trusted Firmware layer (running in EL3 on the application processor cores), triggered by an smc call. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.

[PATCH 4/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI support

This adds support for the SCPI protocol using an SMC mailbox and some shared memory in SRAM. The SCPI provider is implemented in the ARM Trusted Firmware layer (running in EL3 on the application processor cores), triggered by an smc call. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara --- arch/arm64/boot/dts

[PATCH 7/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI power domain support

The SCPI protocol allows controlling device power domains, which abstracts the various ways of providing voltage to devices like Ethernet PHYs or on-board WiFi chips. Provide the power domain provider DT node, which can be referenced by a power domain consumer device. Signed-off-by: Andre

[PATCH 7/8] arm64: dts: allwinner: a64: add SCPI power domain support

The SCPI protocol allows controlling device power domains, which abstracts the various ways of providing voltage to devices like Ethernet PHYs or on-board WiFi chips. Provide the power domain provider DT node, which can be referenced by a power domain consumer device. Signed-off-by: Andre

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v4 5/6] ARM: sun7i: Convert to CCU

Hi, On 25/06/17 21:45, Priit Laes wrote: > Convert sun7i-a20.dtsi to new CCU driver. I know that some people hat^Wget annoyed by me asking this, but anyway: Why do we actually need this? This ultimately makes the DT incompatible with older kernels (as actually shipped by distros today). So if

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v4 5/6] ARM: sun7i: Convert to CCU

Hi, On 25/06/17 21:45, Priit Laes wrote: > Convert sun7i-a20.dtsi to new CCU driver. I know that some people hat^Wget annoyed by me asking this, but anyway: Why do we actually need this? This ultimately makes the DT incompatible with older kernels (as actually shipped by distros today). So if

Re: [PATCH v6 05/21] net-next: stmmac: Add dwmac-sun8i

Hi, On 27/06/17 11:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 于 2017年6月27日 GMT+08:00 下午6:15:58, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> 写到: >> Hi, >> >> On 27/06/17 10:41, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:02:45AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: &

Re: [PATCH v6 05/21] net-next: stmmac: Add dwmac-sun8i

Hi, On 27/06/17 11:23, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 于 2017年6月27日 GMT+08:00 下午6:15:58, Andre Przywara 写到: >> Hi, >> >> On 27/06/17 10:41, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:02:45AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>&

Re: [PATCH v6 05/21] net-next: stmmac: Add dwmac-sun8i

Hi, On 27/06/17 10:41, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:02:45AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> (CC:ing some people from that Rockchip dmwac series) >> >> On 27/06/17 09:21, Corentin Labbe wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 27, 20

Re: [PATCH v6 05/21] net-next: stmmac: Add dwmac-sun8i

Hi, On 27/06/17 10:41, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:02:45AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> (CC:ing some people from that Rockchip dmwac series) >> >> On 27/06/17 09:21, Corentin Labbe wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 27, 20

Re: [PATCH v6 05/21] net-next: stmmac: Add dwmac-sun8i

Hi, (CC:ing some people from that Rockchip dmwac series) On 27/06/17 09:21, Corentin Labbe wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 04:11:21PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Corentin Labbe >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 01:18:23AM +0100,

Re: [PATCH v6 05/21] net-next: stmmac: Add dwmac-sun8i

Hi, (CC:ing some people from that Rockchip dmwac series) On 27/06/17 09:21, Corentin Labbe wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 04:11:21PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Corentin Labbe >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 01:18:23AM +0100, André Przywara wrote:

Re: [PATCH v2] xen: avoid deadlock in xenbus driver

.141087]ret_from_fork+0x10/0x40 > > It is rather easy to avoid by dropping xb_write_mutex before calling > xenbus_dev_queue_reply(). > > Fixes: fd8aa9095a95c02dcc35540a263267c29b8fda9d ("xen: optimize xenbus > driver for multiple concurrent xenstore accesses"). &

Re: [PATCH v2] xen: avoid deadlock in xenbus driver

.141087]ret_from_fork+0x10/0x40 > > It is rather easy to avoid by dropping xb_write_mutex before calling > xenbus_dev_queue_reply(). > > Fixes: fd8aa9095a95c02dcc35540a263267c29b8fda9d ("xen: optimize xenbus > driver for multiple concurrent xenstore accesses"). &

Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add initial NanoPi A64 support

Hi, On 09/06/17 16:26, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Friday 09 June 2017 08:21 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Hi Jagan, >> >> On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 12:40:52PM +, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> + { >>> +pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> +pinctrl-0 = <_pins>; >>> +status = "okay"; >>> +}; >>> + >>>

Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add initial NanoPi A64 support

Hi, On 09/06/17 16:26, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Friday 09 June 2017 08:21 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Hi Jagan, >> >> On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 12:40:52PM +, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> + { >>> +pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> +pinctrl-0 = <_pins>; >>> +status = "okay"; >>> +}; >>> + >>>

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH] arm64: allwinner: sun50i-a64: Remove duplicate ethernet@1c30000

Hi, On 09/06/17 13:40, Jagan Teki wrote: > From: Jagan Teki > > Remove duplicate ethernet@1c3 from allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi I think this is an artefact of the sun8i-dwmac merging, where both David and Maxime merged the DT patches in their trees (compare

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH] arm64: allwinner: sun50i-a64: Remove duplicate ethernet@1c30000

Hi, On 09/06/17 13:40, Jagan Teki wrote: > From: Jagan Teki > > Remove duplicate ethernet@1c3 from allwinner/sun50i-a64.dtsi I think this is an artefact of the sun8i-dwmac merging, where both David and Maxime merged the DT patches in their trees (compare e53f67e9 and 103aefa0). I think

Re: [PATCH] xen: avoid deadlock in xenbus driver

545]mutex_lock_nested+0x3c/0x50 >> [ 248.128016]xenbus_dev_queue_reply+0x3c/0x230 >> [ 248.133005]xenbus_thread+0x788/0x798 >> [ 248.137306]kthread+0x110/0x140 >> [ 248.141087]ret_from_fork+0x10/0x40 >> >> It is rather easy to a

Re: [PATCH] xen: avoid deadlock in xenbus driver

545]mutex_lock_nested+0x3c/0x50 >> [ 248.128016]xenbus_dev_queue_reply+0x3c/0x230 >> [ 248.133005]xenbus_thread+0x788/0x798 >> [ 248.137306]kthread+0x110/0x140 >> [ 248.141087]ret_from_fork+0x10/0x40 >> >> It is rather easy to avoi

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/3] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add initial Orangepi Win/WinPlus support

Hi, On 26/05/17 04:54, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 6:30 AM, André Przywara > wrote: >> On 25/05/17 20:26, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> From: Jagan Teki >>> >>> Orangepi Win/WinPlus is an open-source single-board computer >>> using

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/3] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add initial Orangepi Win/WinPlus support

Hi, On 26/05/17 04:54, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 6:30 AM, André Przywara > wrote: >> On 25/05/17 20:26, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> From: Jagan Teki >>> >>> Orangepi Win/WinPlus is an open-source single-board computer >>> using the Allwinner A64 SOC. >>> >>> A64 Orangepi

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v6 8/9] arm64: allwinner: a64: enable AXP803 regulators for Pine64

Hi, On 19/05/17 09:29, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 于 2017年5月19日 GMT+08:00 下午4:27:21, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> 写到: >> Hi, >> >> On 18/05/17 08:16, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> Add support of AXP803 regulators in the Pine64 device t

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v6 8/9] arm64: allwinner: a64: enable AXP803 regulators for Pine64

Hi, On 19/05/17 09:29, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 于 2017年5月19日 GMT+08:00 下午4:27:21, Andre Przywara 写到: >> Hi, >> >> On 18/05/17 08:16, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> Add support of AXP803 regulators in the Pine64 device tree, in order >> to >>

Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v6 8/9] arm64: allwinner: a64: enable AXP803 regulators for Pine64

Hi, On 18/05/17 08:16, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > Add support of AXP803 regulators in the Pine64 device tree, in order to > enable many future functionalities, e.g. Wi-Fi. > > Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng > --- > Changes in v6: > - Rebased on next-20170517. > >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >