Hi,

As a heads-up, on v4.9-rc1 I see conflicts at least against
arch/arm64/Kconfig. Luckily git am -3 seems to be able to fix that up
automatically, but this will need to be rebased before the next posting
and/or merging.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 02:17:12AM +0800, fu.wei at linaro.org wrote:

+static int __init map_gt_gsi(u32 interrupt, u32 flags)
+{
+	int trigger, polarity;
+
+	if (!interrupt)
+		return 0;

Urgh.

Only the secure interrupt (which we do not need) is optional in this
manner, and (hilariously), zero appears to also be a valid GSIV, per
figure 5-24 in the ACPI 6.1 spec.

So, I think that:

(a) we should not bother parsing the secure interrupt
(b) we should drop the check above
(c) we should report the spec issue to the ASWG

+/*
+ * acpi_gtdt_c3stop - got c3stop info from GTDT
+ *
+ * Returns 1 if the timer is powered in deep idle state, 0 otherwise.
+ */
+bool __init acpi_gtdt_c3stop(void)
+{
+	struct acpi_table_gtdt *gtdt = acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt;
+
+	return !(gtdt->non_secure_el1_flags & ACPI_GTDT_ALWAYS_ON);
+}

It looks like this can differ per interrupt. Shouldn't we check the
appropriate one?

+int __init acpi_gtdt_init(struct acpi_table_header *table)
+{
+	void *start;
+	struct acpi_table_gtdt *gtdt;
+
+	gtdt = container_of(table, struct acpi_table_gtdt, header);
+
+	acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt = gtdt;
+	acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt_end = (void *)table + table->length;
+
+	if (table->revision < 2) {
+		pr_debug("Revision:%d doesn't support Platform Timers.\n",
+			 table->revision);
+		return 0;
+	}
+
+	if (!gtdt->platform_timer_count) {
+		pr_debug("No Platform Timer.\n");
+		return 0;
+	}
+
+	start = (void *)gtdt + gtdt->platform_timer_offset;
+	if (start < (void *)table + sizeof(struct acpi_table_gtdt)) {
+		pr_err(FW_BUG "Failed to retrieve timer info from firmware: invalid data.\n");
+		return -EINVAL;
+	}
+	acpi_gtdt_desc.platform_timer_start = start;
+
+	return gtdt->platform_timer_count;
+}

This is never used as anything other than a status code.

Just return zero; we haven't parsed the platform timers themselves at
this point anyway.

Thanks,
Mark.