qemu-arm
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 16/16] hw/arm/boot: Drop existing dtb /psci node rather than


From: Richard Henderson
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/16] hw/arm/boot: Drop existing dtb /psci node rather than retaining it
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 19:21:38 +1100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0

On 1/28/22 02:46, Peter Maydell wrote:
If we're using PSCI emulation, we add a /psci node to the device tree
we pass to the guest.  At the moment, if the dtb already has a /psci
node in it, we retain it, rather than replacing it. (This behaviour
was added in commit c39770cd637765 in 2018.)

This is a problem if the existing node doesn't match our PSCI
emulation.  In particular, it might specify the wrong method (HVC vs
SMC), or wrong function IDs for cpu_suspend/cpu_off/etc, in which
case the guest will not get the behaviour it wants when it makes PSCI
calls.

An example of this is trying to boot the highbank or midway board
models using the device tree supplied in the kernel sources: this
device tree includes a /psci node that specifies function IDs that
don't match the (PSCI 0.2 compliant) IDs that QEMU uses.  The dtb
cpu_suspend function ID happens to match the PSCI 0.2 cpu_off ID, so
the guest hangs after booting when the kernel tries to idle the CPU
and instead it gets turned off.

Instead of retaining an existing /psci node, delete it entirely
and replace it with a node whose properties match QEMU's PSCI
emulation behaviour. This matches the way we handle /memory nodes,
where we also delete any existing nodes and write in ones that
match the way QEMU is going to behave.

Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
---
I'm not confident about the FDT API to use to remove an
existing node -- I used qemu_fdt_nop_node() as that matches the
code in boot.c that's removing the memory nodes. There is
also an fdt_del_node(), though...

It all depends on whether we've got saved offsets for nodes in the DTB, I guess. fdt_del_node says that it changes node offsets, and fdt_nop_node says that it doesn't.

Anyway,
Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>


r~



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]