Preetam Das commented on a discussion on bsps/shared/start/bspsmp-arm-psci.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1072#note_143407 > #if defined( AARCH64_MULTILIB_ARCH_V8 ) || \ > defined( AARCH64_MULTILIB_ARCH_V8_ILP32 ) > uint32_t PSCI_FN_SYSTEM_CPU_ON = 0xC4000003; > - uint64_t target_cpu = _AArch64_Read_mpidr_el1(); > + uint64_t target_cpu = _AArch64_Get_MPIDR_for_cpu_index( cpu_index ); > + target_cpu &= ( 0x00ff00ffffffULL ); > uint64_t ret; > #else > uint32_t PSCI_FN_SYSTEM_CPU_ON = 0x84000003; > - uint32_t target_cpu = _AArch32_Read_mpidr(); > + uint32_t target_cpu = _ARM_Get_MPIDR_for_cpu_index( cpu_index ); > + target_cpu &= ( 0x00ffffffUL ); If we want such function that would provide ready to use `target_cpu` field with the mask already applied, then I think it should be called something else, not `_AArch_Get_MPIDR_for_cpu_index` because it sound like it returns the raw MPIDR values. So, I am guessing we want to keep the new `_AArch64_Get_MPIDR_for_cpu_index` implementation and just to add another one `uintptr_t _AARCH_Get_PSCI_cpu_target( uint32_t )` to remove the duplication, right? Or should I drop the previous one? -- View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1072#note_143407 You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.
_______________________________________________ bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs
