From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E7EC433B4 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 21:18:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C85361179 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 21:18:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232387AbhDHVSk (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Apr 2021 17:18:40 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57414 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232332AbhDHVSj (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Apr 2021 17:18:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08BE9C061761 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 14:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id a85so2340106pfa.0 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:18:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references :subject:from:cc:to:date:message-id:user-agent; bh=eMJqD/fqXJ5uLABupYwuAFtb+eXg8FbLVYjFY1l+JZE=; b=WXrRoVzuMf9BD4yUg+IpXzC2x3gX/wbaMSa6eADIuq8tW2NcrsTP8iBbT0ZE+BBspY UdjqkArP2IGzTenHhET/UYo7gZvZSBSoDn+GrXCgbPMMTAPdkUJxEi6hN2K7Ds8w9Orh GQgnI7o1QA3fn+jTBiFwoLOPpElxYm+J6VCqQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:references:subject:from:cc:to:date:message-id :user-agent; bh=eMJqD/fqXJ5uLABupYwuAFtb+eXg8FbLVYjFY1l+JZE=; b=d7hUtfbqfLFLfaPorfATGEiUNBM1yRTP/79Tj7WVUFzzOd2h3DrB27vaq7G3Lg/cH0 bOfPer7KCUvE3xIiOsU3QG2tlkMNb37AlwOtfTaNYt9YmF8cbmPr9+a/aQvs9UvE/gsW 74Fej0LdQOCa9HJyZBQ2w4pAo2B3e4KlYYxTBE24Wzwai+PIvxFDipHnckhbtx2X7qAT OYgger/MQ76IRFUDsx2KE/3cQ3TfZPsn62Pmq6hXrrT1gpIdUa+jpb2veFyrr1DkVN46 zRVijPSG7YM8ZdU7rSGYs1BQG0JmO75CJH9PaSgdAWaXO3M267aHAvpEeqczBy/G2zFx 2VLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ovz9WTxCF2XLIFdMUE+/Lm+KRT1y66blaYiZsRXPhvCr+YULi pDJyZ9EOwFNLAhYqja5eAEJoSg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzqcrjJVjp7Jz1iRbl6acGeE5u8fk0+tkP162pfieOXXOIbCvRvJBqRdizl0jmycyffZ7/RVw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1595:b029:217:49e9:2429 with SMTP id u21-20020a056a001595b029021749e92429mr9440770pfk.80.1617916707523; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:18:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chromium.org ([2620:15c:202:201:44c3:3248:e7f5:1bbd]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z20sm243105pfk.21.2021.04.08.14.18.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: References: <20210323224336.1311783-1-swboyd@chromium.org> <6ec0ca8d-85c7-53d6-acf2-22c4ac13e805@codeaurora.org> <161734672825.2260335.8472441215895199196@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <161738411853.2260335.5107124874054215375@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <161784072681.3790633.7665111601750934002@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] firmware: qcom_scm: Only compile legacy calls on ARM From: Stephen Boyd Cc: Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Elliot Berman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Brian Masney , Jeffrey Hugo , Douglas Anderson To: Stephan Gerhold Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:18:25 -0700 Message-ID: <161791670545.3790633.14772376161713976241@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: alot/0.9.1 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Quoting Stephan Gerhold (2021-04-08 00:19:44) > Personally, I think it would be best to introduce a new, SMC64 only > compatible (e.g. "qcom,scm-64" like I mentioned). Then you can skip the > detection check for the boards that opt-in by adding the compatible. > You can then use it on all newer boards/SoCs/firmwares where you know > exactly that there is SMC64. >=20 > I would just like to avoid breaking any existing boards where we don't > know exactly if they have SMC32 or SMC64. Ok that's fair. > >=20 > > Heh, it tried to ensure we use the right calling convention but broke > > things in the process, because the way of detecting the convention isn't > > always there. I wouldn't be surprised if this comes up again for other > > boards that use TF-A. >=20 > Ah okay, this sounds like a better reason than just trying to avoid the > "overhead" of the detection step. :) I still think it should work if you > just start marking all newer boards/SoCs/... as "qcom,scm-64" or > something like that, right? Sure. I can cook up a set of patches for this.