Hi Julien,

On 8 February 2018 at 20:12, Julien Grall <julien.gr...@arm.com> wrote:

Currently, the behavior of do_common_cpu will slightly change depending
>>> on the PSCI version passed in parameter. Looking at the code, more the
>>> specific 0.2 behavior could move out of the function or adapted for 0.1:
>>>      - x0/r0 can be updated on PSCI 0.1 because general purpose registers
>>>      are undefined upon CPU on.
>>>      - PSCI 0.1 does not defined PSCI_ALREADY_ON. However, it would be
>>>      safer to bail out if the CPU is already on.
>>> Based on this, the parameter 'ver' is removed and do_psci_cpu_on
>>> (implementation for PSCI 0.1) is adapted to avoid returning
>>> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Volodymyr Babchuk <volodymyr_babc...@epam.com>
> Thank you for the reviewed. FIY, I moved that patch towards the end of the
> series as it is not necessary for backporting. I kept your reviewed-by
> because there are no clash.
> I hope that is fine for you.
Yes, I'm perfectly fine with this.

WBR Volodymyr Babchuk aka lorc [+380976646013]
mailto: vlad.babc...@gmail.com

Xen-devel mailing list

Reply via email to