[U-Boot] [PATCH 05/15] ARM: PSCI: Add fallback value for CONFIG_ARMV7_PSCI_NR_CPUS

[Hongbo Zhang]

On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens at csie.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Hongbo Zhang <macro.wave.z at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens at csie.org> wrote:
>>> The original PSCI implementation assumed CONFIG_ARMV7_PSCI_NR_CPUS=4.
>>> Add this as a fallback value in case platforms have not defined it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens at csie.org>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm/include/asm/config.h | 5 +++++
>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/config.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/config.h
>>> index 435fc4521c2e..f70302dfc4f1 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/config.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/config.h
>>> @@ -23,4 +23,9 @@
>>>  #include <asm/arch/config.h>
>>>  #endif
>>>
>>> +/* Original code assumed 4 CPUs */
>>> +#ifndef CONFIG_ARMV7_PSCI_NR_CPUS
>>> +#define CONFIG_ARMV7_PSCI_NR_CPUS 4
>>
>> This makes platforms which have there own macro definition embarrassed somehow.
>> we should add
>> #define CONFIG_ARMV7_PSCI_NR_CPUS CONFIG_MAX_CPUS
>> if this patch merged.
>> some of our platform even has 16 cores.
>
> I'm not sure how CONFIG_MAX_CPUS is used though.
>
> Thinking about this, my first approach is probably wrong.
> I should add missing PSCI_NR_CPUS for the existing platforms.
> New platforms should define it themselves when enabling PSCI.

Yes, this is better.

> Failure to do so will result in a compile error, rather than
> having a fallback value that subtly breaks later on.
>
> Regards
> ChenYu
>
>>
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>>  #endif
>>> --
>>> 2.8.1
>>>