[v6,17/17] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64

Message ID	1420368918-5086-18-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org (mailing list archive)
State	Superseded, archived
Headers	show Return-Path: <linux-acpi-owner@kernel.org> From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>, Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>, Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@arm.com>, Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com>, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>, Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com, phoenix.liyi@huawei.com, Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>, suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> Subject: [PATCH v6 17/17] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64 Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 18:55:18 +0800 Message-Id: <1420368918-5086-18-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <1420368918-5086-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> References: <1420368918-5086-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk

diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt b/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..21e7020 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt @@ -0,0 +1,327 @@ +ACPI on ARMv8 Servers +--------------------- +ACPI can be used for ARMv8 general purpose servers designed to follow +the ARM SBSA (Server Base System Architecture) and SBBR (Server Base +Boot Requirements) specifications, currently available to those with +an ARM login at http://silver.arm.com. + +The ARMv8 kernel implements the reduced hardware model of ACPI version +5.1 and later. Links to the specification and all external documents +it refers to are managed by the UEFI Forum. The specification is +available at http://www.uefi.org/specifications and external documents +can be found via http://www.uefi.org/acpi. + +If an ARMv8 system does not meet the requirements of the SBSA, or cannot +be described using the mechanisms defined in the required ACPI specifications, +then it is likely that Device Tree (DT) is more suitable than ACPI for the +hardware. + + +Relationship with Device Tree +----------------------------- +ACPI support in drivers and subsystems for ARMv8 should never be mutually +exclusive with DT support at compile time. + +At boot time the kernel will only use one description method depending on +parameters passed from the bootloader (including kernel bootargs). + +Regardless of whether DT or ACPI is used, the kernel must always be capable +of booting with either scheme (in kernels with both schemes enabled at compile +time). + + +Booting using ACPI tables +------------------------- +The only defined method for passing ACPI tables to the kernel on ARMv8 +is via the UEFI system configuration table. + +Processing of ACPI tables may be disabled by passing acpi=off on the kernel +command line; this is the default behavior if both ACPI and DT tables are +present. If acpi=force is used, the kernel will ONLY use device configuration +information contained in the ACPI tables if those tables are available. + +In order for the kernel to load and use ACPI tables, the UEFI implementation +MUST set the ACPI_20_TABLE_GUID to point to the RSDP table (the table with +the ACPI signature "RSD PTR "). If this pointer is incorrect and acpi=force +is used, the kernel will disable ACPI and try to use DT to boot instead. + +If the pointer to the RSDP table is correct, the table will be mapped into +the kernel by the ACPI core, using the address provided by UEFI. + +The ACPI core will then locate and map in all other ACPI tables provided by +using the addresses in the RSDP table to find the XSDT (eXtended System +Description Table). The XSDT in turn provides the addresses to all other +ACPI tables provided by the system firmware; the ACPI core will then traverse +this table and map in the tables listed. + +The ACPI core will ignore any provided RSDT (Root System Description Table). +RSDTs have been deprecated and are ignored on arm64 since they only allow +for 32-bit addresses. + +Further, the ACPI core will only use the 64-bit address fields in the FADT +(Fixed ACPI Description Table). Any 32-bit address fields in the FADT will +be ignored on arm64. + +Hardware reduced mode (see Section 4.1 of the ACPI 5.1 specification) will +be enforced by the ACPI core on arm64. Doing so allows the ACPI core to +run less complex code since it no longer has to provide support for legacy +hardware from other architectures. + +For the ACPI core to operate properly, and in turn provide the information +the kernel needs to configure devices, it expects to find the following +tables (all section numbers refer to the ACPI 5.1 specfication): + + -- RSDP (Root System Description Pointer), section 5.2.5 + + -- XSDT (eXtended System Description Table), section 5.2.8 + + -- FADT (Fixed ACPI Description Table), section 5.2.9 + + -- DSDT (Differentiated System Description Table), section + 5.2.11.1 + + -- MADT (Multiple APIC Description Table), section 5.2.12 + + -- GTDT (Generic Timer Description Table), section 5.2.24 + + -- If PCI is supported, the MCFG (Memory mapped ConFiGuration + Table), section 5.2.6, specifically Table 5-31. + +If the above tables are not all present, the kernel may or may not be +able to boot properly since it may not be able to configure all of the +devices available. + + +ACPI Detection +-------------- +Drivers should determine their probe() type by checking for a null +value for ACPI_HANDLE, or checking .of_node, or other information in +the device structure. This is detailed further in the "Driver +Recommendations" section. + +In non-driver code, if the presence of ACPI needs to be detected at +runtime, then check the value of acpi_disabled. If CONFIG_ACPI is not +set, acpi_disabled will always be 1. + + +Device Enumeration +------------------ +Device descriptions in ACPI should use standard recognized ACPI interfaces. +These may contain less information than is typically provided via a Device +Tree description for the same device. This is also one of the reasons that +ACPI can be useful -- the driver takes into account that it may have less +detailed information about the device and uses sensible defaults instead. +If done properly in the driver, the hardware can change and improve over +time without the driver having to change at all. + +Clocks provide an excellent example. In DT, clocks need to be specified +and the drivers need to take them into account. In ACPI, the assumption +is that UEFI will leave the device in a reasonable default state, including +any clock settings. If for some reason the driver needs to change a clock +value, this can be done in an ACPI method; all the driver needs to do is +invoke the method and not concern itself with what the method needs to do +to change the clock. Changing the hardware can then take place over time +by changing what the ACPI method does, and not the driver. + +ACPI drivers should only look at one specific ASL object -- the _DSD object +-- for device driver parameters (known in DT as "bindings", or "Device +Properties" in ACPI). DT bindings also will be reviewed before used. The UEFI +Forum provides a mechanism for registering such bindings [URL TBD by ASWG] +so that they may be used on any operating system supporting ACPI. Device +properties that have not been registered with the UEFI Forum should not be +used. + +Drivers should look for device properties in the _DSD object ONLY; the _DSD +object is described in the ACPI specification section 6.2.5, but more +specifically, use the _DSD Device Properties UUID: + + -- UUID: daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301 + + -- http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-device-properties-UUID.pdf + +The kernel has an interface for looking up device properties in a manner +independent of whether DT or ACPI is being used and that interface should +be used; it can eliminate some duplication of code paths in driver probing +functions and discourage divergence between DT bindings and ACPI device +properties. + +ACPI tables are described with a formal language called ASL, the ACPI +Source Language (section 19 of the specification). This means that there +are always multiple ways to describe the same thing -- including device +properties. For example, device properties could use an ASL construct +that looks like this: Name(KEY0, "value0"). An ACPI device driver would +then retrieve the value of the property by evaluating the KEY0 object. +However, using Name() this way has multiple problems: (1) ACPI limits +names ("KEY0") to four characters unlike DT; (2) there is no industry +wide registry that maintains a list of names, minimzing re-use; (3) +there is also no registry for the definition of property values ("value0"), +again making re-use difficult; and (4) how does one maintain backward +compatibility as new hardware comes out? The _DSD method was created +to solve precisely these sorts of problems; Linux drivers should ALWAYS +use the _DSD method for device properties and nothing else. + +The _DSM object (ACPI Section 9.14.1) could also be used for conveying +device properties to a driver. Linux drivers should only expect it to +be used if _DSD cannot represent the data required, and there is no way +to create a new UUID for the _DSD object. Note that there is even less +regulation of the use of _DSM than there is of _DSD. Drivers that depend +on the contents of _DSM objects will be more difficult to maintain over +time because of this. + +The _DSD object is a very flexible mechanism in ACPI, as are the registered +Device Properties. This flexibility allows _DSD to cover more than just the +generic server case and care should be taken in device drivers not to expect +it to replicate highly specific embedded behaviour from DT. + +Both DT bindings and ACPI device properties for device drivers have review +processes. Use them. And, before creating new device properties, check to +be sure that they have not been defined before and either registered in the +Linux kernel documentation or the UEFI Forum. If the device drivers supports +ACPI and DT, please make sure the device properties are consistent in both +places. + + +Programmable Power Control Resources +------------------------------------ +Programmable power control resources include such resources as voltage/current +providers (regulators) and clock sources. + +The kernel assumes that power control of these resources is represented with +Power Resource Objects (ACPI section 7.1). The ACPI core will then handle +correctly enabling and disabling resources as they are needed. In order to +get that to work, ACPI assumes each device has defined D-states and that these +can be controlled through the optional ACPI methods _PS0, _PS1, _PS2, and _PS3; +in ACPI, _PS0 is the method to invoke to turn a device full on, and _PS3 is for +turning a device full off. + +There are two options for using those Power Resources. + -- be managed in _PSx routine which gets called on entry to Dx. + + -- be declared separately as power resources with their own _ON and _OFF + methods. They are then tied back to D-states for a particular device + via _PRx which specifies which power resources a device needs to be on + while in Dx. Kernel then tracks number of devices using a power resource + and calls _ON/_OFF as needed. + +The kernel ACPI code will also assume that the _PSx methods follow the normal +ACPI rules for such methods: + + -- If either _PS0 or _PS3 is implemented, then the other method must also + be implemented. + + -- If a device requires usage or setup of a power resource when on, the ASL + should organize that it is allocated/enabled using the _PS0 method. + + -- Resources allocated or enabled in the _PS0 method should be disabled + or de-allocated in the _PS3 method. + + -- Firmware will leave the resources in a reasonable state before handing + over control to the kernel. + +Such code in _PSx methods will of course be very platform specific. But, +this allows the driver to abstract out the interface for operating the device +and avoid having to read special non-standard values from ACPI tables. Further, +abstracting the use of these resources allows the hardware to change over time +without requiring updates to the driver. + + +Clocks +------ +ACPI makes the assumption that clocks are initialized by the firmware -- +UEFI, in this case -- to some working value before control is handed over +to the kernel. This has implications for devices such as UARTs, or SoC-driven +LCD displays, for example. + +When the kernel boots, the clock is assumed to be set to a reasonable +working value. If for some reason the frequency needs to change -- e.g., +throttling for power management -- the device driver should expect that +process to be abstracted out into some ACPI method that can be invoked +(please see the ACPI specification for further recommendations on standard +methods to be expected) except CPU clocks where CPPC provides a much richer +interface instead of some method. If it is not, there is no direct way for +ACPI to control the clocks. + + +Driver Recommendations +---------------------- +DO NOT remove any DT handling when adding ACPI support for a driver. The +same device may be used on many different systems. + +DO try to structure the driver so that it is data-driven. That is, set up +a struct containing internal per-device state based on defaults and whatever +else must be discovered by the driver probe function. Then, have the rest +of the driver operate off of the contents of that struct. Doing so should +allow most divergence between ACPI and DT functionality to be kept local to +the probe function instead of being scattered throughout the driver. For +example: + +static int device_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev) +{ + /* DT specific functionality */ + ... +} + +static int device_probe_acpi(struct platform_device *pdev) +{ + /* ACPI specific functionality */ + ... +} + +static int device_probe(stuct platform_device *pdev) +{ + ... + struct device_node node = pdev->dev.of_node; + ... + + if (node) + ret = device_probe_dt(pdev); + else if (ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev)) + ret = device_probe_acpi(pdev); + else + /* other initialization */ + ... + /* Continue with any generic probe operations */ + ... +} + +DO keep the MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE entries together in the driver to make it +clear the different names the driver is probed for, both from DT and from +ACPI: + +static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = { + { .compatible = "virtio,mmio", }, + { } +}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match); + +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = { + { "LNRO0005", }, + { } +}; +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match); + + +ASWG +---- +The following areas are not yet fully defined for ARM in the 5.1 version +of the ACPI specification and are expected to be worked through in the +UEFI ACPI Specification Working Group (ASWG): + + -- ACPI based CPU topology + -- ACPI based CPU idle control + -- ACPI based SMMU and its IO topology + -- ITS support for GIC in MADT + +Participation in this group is open to all UEFI members. Please see +http://www.uefi.org/workinggroup for details on group membership. + +It is the intent of the ARMv8 ACPI kernel code to follow the ACPI specification +as closely as possible, and to only implement functionality that complies with +the released standards from UEFI ASWG. As a practical matter, there will be +vendors that provide bad ACPI tables or violate the standards in some way. +If this is because of errors, quirks and fixups may be necessary, but will +be avoided if possible. If there are features missing from ACPI that preclude +it from being used on a platform, ECRs (Engineering Change Requests) should be +submitted to ASWG and go through the normal approval process; for those that +are not UEFI members, many other members of the Linux community are and would +likely be willing to assist in submitting ECRs.

[v6,17/17] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64

Commit Message

Comments

Patch