Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] xen/arm : emulation of arm's psci v0.2 standard

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 23 Jun 2014, Parth Dixit wrote:
> Next version of my patch is ready except for following things on which i need 
> your suggestion
> 1. Exposing PSCI v0.2 functions in device tree - This was not done because it 
> gives the impression that you can modify the function id's
> and kernel will call the function id's based on function id's exposed in 
> device tree whereas kernel ignores it for PSCI v0.2 while it
> follows it for PSCI v0.1 which can be confusing. Either way is fine with me.
> 2. ÂWhy do you clear the IRQ flag in psci_suspend - I am taking cue from the 
> "vcpu_block_enable_events" in xen/common/schedule.c where
> flag is cleared to enable interrupts before pausing the cpu.

Keep in mind that vcpu_block_enable_events is common code, while
local_event_delivery_enable is the arm specific implementation.

In the arm case local_event_delivery_enable is implemented by clearing
PSR_IRQ_MASK because effectively that's what is needed to enable event
delivery. Events are just a Xen specific kind of interrupts.

vcpu_block_enable_events calls local_event_delivery_enable before
blocking a vcpu, to make sure it can wake the vcpu up if an event needs
to be delivered to it.

We need to clear PSR_IRQ_MASK because the CPU_SUSPEND call "is intended
for use in idle subsystems where the core is expected to return to
execution through a wake up event". The vcpu is never going to come up
again if we don't clear PSR_IRQ_MASK, because events wouldn't be
delivered to it.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel