diff mbox

[v8,4/8] ARM: EXYNOS: refactor firmware specific routines

Message ID 1481375323-29724-5-git-send-email-pankaj.dubey@samsung.com (mailing list archive)
State Changes Requested
Headers show

Commit Message

Pankaj Dubey Dec. 10, 2016, 1:08 p.m. UTC 
To remove dependency on soc_is_exynosMMMM macros and remove multiple
checks for such macros lets refactor code in firmware.c file.
SoC specific firmware_ops are separated and registered during
exynos_firmware_init based on matching machine compatible.

Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

Comments

Krzysztof Kozlowski Dec. 16, 2016, 6:25 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 06:38:39PM +0530, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> To remove dependency on soc_is_exynosMMMM macros and remove multiple
> checks for such macros lets refactor code in firmware.c file.
> SoC specific firmware_ops are separated and registered during
> exynos_firmware_init based on matching machine compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
> index fd6da54..525fbd9 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,25 @@ static void exynos_save_cp15(void)
>  	     : : "cc");
>  }
>  
> +static int exynos3250_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
> +{
> +	switch (mode) {
> +	case FW_DO_IDLE_AFTR:
> +		writel_relaxed(virt_to_phys(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
> +			       sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
> +		writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
> +		flush_cache_all();
> +		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
> +				SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
> +		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
> +				SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
> +		break;
> +	case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
> +		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
> +	}
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>  {
>  	switch (mode) {
> @@ -44,14 +63,7 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>  		writel_relaxed(virt_to_phys(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
>  			       sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
>  		writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
> -		if (soc_is_exynos3250()) {
> -			flush_cache_all();
> -			exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
> -				   SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
> -			exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
> -				   SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
> -		} else
> -			exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
> +		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
>  		break;
>  	case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
>  		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
> @@ -59,28 +71,25 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
> +static int exynos4412_cpu_boot(int cpu)
>  {
>  	/*
> -	 * Exynos3250 doesn't need to send smc command for secondary CPU boot
> -	 * because Exynos3250 removes WFE in secure mode.
> -	 */
> -	if (soc_is_exynos3250())
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	/*
>  	 * The second parameter of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command means CPU id.
>  	 * But, Exynos4212 has only one secondary CPU so second parameter
>  	 * isn't used for informing secure firmware about CPU id.
>  	 */
> -	if (soc_is_exynos4212())
> -		cpu = 0;
> +	cpu = 0;

Why are you clearing the cpu for Exynos4412? Was it tested on
Exynos4412?

> +	exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT, cpu, 0, 0);
> +	return 0;
> +}
>  
> +static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
> +{
>  	exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT, cpu, 0, 0);

This will be executed on Exynos4212...

>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
> +static int exynos4412_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
>  {
>  	void __iomem *boot_reg;
>  
> @@ -94,14 +103,24 @@ static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
>  	 * additional offset for every CPU, with Exynos4412 being the only
>  	 * exception.
>  	 */
> -	if (soc_is_exynos4412())
> -		boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
> +	boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
> +	writel_relaxed(boot_addr, boot_reg);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
> +{
> +	void __iomem *boot_reg;
>  
> +	if (!sysram_ns_base_addr)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
>  	writel_relaxed(boot_addr, boot_reg);
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
> +static int exynos4412_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
>  {
>  	void __iomem *boot_reg;
>  
> @@ -109,10 +128,19 @@ static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
>  	boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
> +	boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
> +	*boot_addr = readl_relaxed(boot_reg);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
> +{
> +	void __iomem *boot_reg;
>  
> -	if (soc_is_exynos4412())
> -		boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
> +	if (!sysram_ns_base_addr)
> +		return -ENODEV;
>  
> +	boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
>  	*boot_addr = readl_relaxed(boot_reg);
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -148,6 +176,23 @@ static int exynos_resume(void)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static const struct firmware_ops exynos3250_firmware_ops = {
> +	.do_idle		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos3250_do_idle : NULL,
> +	.set_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr,
> +	.get_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr,

You know that lack of cpu_boot() is not equivalent to previous
'return 0' code? Now -ENOSYS will be returned... which is not a problem
because return values for cpu_boot are ignored... just wondering whether
this was planned.

> +	.suspend		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? exynos_suspend : NULL,
> +	.resume			= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_resume : NULL,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct firmware_ops exynos4412_firmware_ops = {
> +	.do_idle		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_do_idle : NULL,
> +	.set_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos4412_set_cpu_boot_addr,
> +	.get_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos4412_get_cpu_boot_addr,
> +	.cpu_boot		= exynos4412_cpu_boot,
> +	.suspend		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? exynos_suspend : NULL,
> +	.resume			= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_resume : NULL,
> +};
> +
>  static const struct firmware_ops exynos_firmware_ops = {
>  	.do_idle		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_do_idle : NULL,
>  	.set_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr,
> @@ -212,7 +257,12 @@ void __init exynos_firmware_init(void)
>  
>  	pr_info("Running under secure firmware.\n");
>  
> -	register_firmware_ops(&exynos_firmware_ops);
> +	if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos3250"))
> +		register_firmware_ops(&exynos3250_firmware_ops);
> +	else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412"))
> +		register_firmware_ops(&exynos4412_firmware_ops);
> +	else
> +		register_firmware_ops(&exynos_firmware_ops);

I prefer one register_firmware_ops() call, so something like:
	const struct firmware_ops *ops;
	if (...)
		ops = &exynos3250_firmware_ops;
	else if ()
		...
	register_firmware_ops(ops);

It is a matter of taste but for me it is more common pattern, looks more
readable and it reduces number of callers to register_firmware_ops() (so
it is easier to find them).

Krzysztof
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Exynos 4 SoCs (based on Cortex A9 and equipped with L2C-310),
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Pankaj Dubey Dec. 17, 2016, 3:50 a.m. UTC | #2 
Hi Krzysztof,

On 16 December 2016 at 23:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 06:38:39PM +0530, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
>> To remove dependency on soc_is_exynosMMMM macros and remove multiple
>> checks for such macros lets refactor code in firmware.c file.
>> SoC specific firmware_ops are separated and registered during
>> exynos_firmware_init based on matching machine compatible.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>  1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> index fd6da54..525fbd9 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
>> @@ -35,6 +35,25 @@ static void exynos_save_cp15(void)
>>            : : "cc");
>>  }
>>
>> +static int exynos3250_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>> +{
>> +     switch (mode) {
>> +     case FW_DO_IDLE_AFTR:
>> +             writel_relaxed(virt_to_phys(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
>> +                            sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
>> +             writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
>> +             flush_cache_all();
>> +             exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
>> +                             SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> +             exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
>> +                             SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> +             break;
>> +     case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
>> +             exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
>> +     }
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>>  static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>>  {
>>       switch (mode) {
>> @@ -44,14 +63,7 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>>               writel_relaxed(virt_to_phys(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
>>                              sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
>>               writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
>> -             if (soc_is_exynos3250()) {
>> -                     flush_cache_all();
>> -                     exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
>> -                                SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> -                     exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
>> -                                SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
>> -             } else
>> -                     exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
>> +             exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
>>               break;
>>       case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
>>               exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
>> @@ -59,28 +71,25 @@ static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
>>       return 0;
>>  }
>>
>> -static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
>> +static int exynos4412_cpu_boot(int cpu)
>>  {
>>       /*
>> -      * Exynos3250 doesn't need to send smc command for secondary CPU boot
>> -      * because Exynos3250 removes WFE in secure mode.
>> -      */
>> -     if (soc_is_exynos3250())
>> -             return 0;
>> -
>> -     /*
>>        * The second parameter of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command means CPU id.
>>        * But, Exynos4212 has only one secondary CPU so second parameter
>>        * isn't used for informing secure firmware about CPU id.
>>        */
>> -     if (soc_is_exynos4212())
>> -             cpu = 0;
>> +     cpu = 0;
>
> Why are you clearing the cpu for Exynos4412? Was it tested on
> Exynos4412?
>

No I have not tested on Exynos4412.
I can see I missed this, and we are suppose clear the cpu only for Exynos4212.
I will fix this in v9 and resubmit again. Thanks for noticing this and
pointing out.


>> +     exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT, cpu, 0, 0);
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>>
>> +static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
>> +{
>>       exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT, cpu, 0, 0);
>
> This will be executed on Exynos4212...
>

Yes, which is wrong. This should be for Exynos4412 and previous one
(exynos4412_cpu_boot) is applicable for Exynos4212. I will fix this in v9.

>>       return 0;
>>  }
>>
>> -static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
>> +static int exynos4412_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
>>  {
>>       void __iomem *boot_reg;
>>
>> @@ -94,14 +103,24 @@ static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
>>        * additional offset for every CPU, with Exynos4412 being the only
>>        * exception.
>>        */
>> -     if (soc_is_exynos4412())
>> -             boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
>> +     boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
>> +     writel_relaxed(boot_addr, boot_reg);
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
>> +{
>> +     void __iomem *boot_reg;
>>
>> +     if (!sysram_ns_base_addr)
>> +             return -ENODEV;
>> +
>> +     boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
>>       writel_relaxed(boot_addr, boot_reg);
>>       return 0;
>>  }
>>
>> -static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
>> +static int exynos4412_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
>>  {
>>       void __iomem *boot_reg;
>>
>> @@ -109,10 +128,19 @@ static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
>>               return -ENODEV;
>>
>>       boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
>> +     boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
>> +     *boot_addr = readl_relaxed(boot_reg);
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
>> +{
>> +     void __iomem *boot_reg;
>>
>> -     if (soc_is_exynos4412())
>> -             boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
>> +     if (!sysram_ns_base_addr)
>> +             return -ENODEV;
>>
>> +     boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
>>       *boot_addr = readl_relaxed(boot_reg);
>>       return 0;
>>  }
>> @@ -148,6 +176,23 @@ static int exynos_resume(void)
>>       return 0;
>>  }
>>
>> +static const struct firmware_ops exynos3250_firmware_ops = {
>> +     .do_idle                = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos3250_do_idle : NULL,
>> +     .set_cpu_boot_addr      = exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr,
>> +     .get_cpu_boot_addr      = exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr,
>
> You know that lack of cpu_boot() is not equivalent to previous
> 'return 0' code? Now -ENOSYS will be returned... which is not a problem
> because return values for cpu_boot are ignored... just wondering whether
> this was planned.

Yes, I feel it should return -ENOSYS, if the particular ops is not
relevant or applicable
for some SoC, rather having blank implementation and returning 0 is
should return error
code.

>
>> +     .suspend                = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? exynos_suspend : NULL,
>> +     .resume                 = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_resume : NULL,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct firmware_ops exynos4412_firmware_ops = {
>> +     .do_idle                = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_do_idle : NULL,
>> +     .set_cpu_boot_addr      = exynos4412_set_cpu_boot_addr,
>> +     .get_cpu_boot_addr      = exynos4412_get_cpu_boot_addr,
>> +     .cpu_boot               = exynos4412_cpu_boot,
>> +     .suspend                = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? exynos_suspend : NULL,
>> +     .resume                 = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_resume : NULL,
>> +};
>> +
>>  static const struct firmware_ops exynos_firmware_ops = {
>>       .do_idle                = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_do_idle : NULL,
>>       .set_cpu_boot_addr      = exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr,
>> @@ -212,7 +257,12 @@ void __init exynos_firmware_init(void)
>>
>>       pr_info("Running under secure firmware.\n");
>>
>> -     register_firmware_ops(&exynos_firmware_ops);
>> +     if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos3250"))
>> +             register_firmware_ops(&exynos3250_firmware_ops);
>> +     else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412"))
>> +             register_firmware_ops(&exynos4412_firmware_ops);
>> +     else
>> +             register_firmware_ops(&exynos_firmware_ops);
>
> I prefer one register_firmware_ops() call, so something like:
>         const struct firmware_ops *ops;
>         if (...)
>                 ops = &exynos3250_firmware_ops;
>         else if ()
>                 ...
>         register_firmware_ops(ops);
>
> It is a matter of taste but for me it is more common pattern, looks more
> readable and it reduces number of callers to register_firmware_ops() (so
> it is easier to find them).
>

This suggestion looks good to me as well. Will adopt this in v9.

Thanks for your review.

Pankaj Dubey
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
index fd6da54..525fbd9 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
@@ -35,6 +35,25 @@  static void exynos_save_cp15(void)
 	     : : "cc");
 }
 
+static int exynos3250_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
+{
+	switch (mode) {
+	case FW_DO_IDLE_AFTR:
+		writel_relaxed(virt_to_phys(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
+			       sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
+		writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
+		flush_cache_all();
+		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
+				SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
+		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
+				SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
+		break;
+	case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
+		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
+	}
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
 {
 	switch (mode) {
@@ -44,14 +63,7 @@  static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
 		writel_relaxed(virt_to_phys(exynos_cpu_resume_ns),
 			       sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x24);
 		writel_relaxed(EXYNOS_AFTR_MAGIC, sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x20);
-		if (soc_is_exynos3250()) {
-			flush_cache_all();
-			exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SAVE, OP_TYPE_CORE,
-				   SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
-			exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SHUTDOWN, OP_TYPE_CLUSTER,
-				   SMC_POWERSTATE_IDLE, 0);
-		} else
-			exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
+		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU0AFTR, 0, 0, 0);
 		break;
 	case FW_DO_IDLE_SLEEP:
 		exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_SLEEP, 0, 0, 0);
@@ -59,28 +71,25 @@  static int exynos_do_idle(unsigned long mode)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
+static int exynos4412_cpu_boot(int cpu)
 {
 	/*
-	 * Exynos3250 doesn't need to send smc command for secondary CPU boot
-	 * because Exynos3250 removes WFE in secure mode.
-	 */
-	if (soc_is_exynos3250())
-		return 0;
-
-	/*
 	 * The second parameter of SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT command means CPU id.
 	 * But, Exynos4212 has only one secondary CPU so second parameter
 	 * isn't used for informing secure firmware about CPU id.
 	 */
-	if (soc_is_exynos4212())
-		cpu = 0;
+	cpu = 0;
+	exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT, cpu, 0, 0);
+	return 0;
+}
 
+static int exynos_cpu_boot(int cpu)
+{
 	exynos_smc(SMC_CMD_CPU1BOOT, cpu, 0, 0);
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
+static int exynos4412_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
 {
 	void __iomem *boot_reg;
 
@@ -94,14 +103,24 @@  static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
 	 * additional offset for every CPU, with Exynos4412 being the only
 	 * exception.
 	 */
-	if (soc_is_exynos4412())
-		boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
+	boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
+	writel_relaxed(boot_addr, boot_reg);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long boot_addr)
+{
+	void __iomem *boot_reg;
 
+	if (!sysram_ns_base_addr)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
 	writel_relaxed(boot_addr, boot_reg);
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
+static int exynos4412_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
 {
 	void __iomem *boot_reg;
 
@@ -109,10 +128,19 @@  static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
 		return -ENODEV;
 
 	boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
+	boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
+	*boot_addr = readl_relaxed(boot_reg);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr(int cpu, unsigned long *boot_addr)
+{
+	void __iomem *boot_reg;
 
-	if (soc_is_exynos4412())
-		boot_reg += 4 * cpu;
+	if (!sysram_ns_base_addr)
+		return -ENODEV;
 
+	boot_reg = sysram_ns_base_addr + 0x1c;
 	*boot_addr = readl_relaxed(boot_reg);
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -148,6 +176,23 @@  static int exynos_resume(void)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static const struct firmware_ops exynos3250_firmware_ops = {
+	.do_idle		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos3250_do_idle : NULL,
+	.set_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr,
+	.get_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos_get_cpu_boot_addr,
+	.suspend		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? exynos_suspend : NULL,
+	.resume			= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_resume : NULL,
+};
+
+static const struct firmware_ops exynos4412_firmware_ops = {
+	.do_idle		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_do_idle : NULL,
+	.set_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos4412_set_cpu_boot_addr,
+	.get_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos4412_get_cpu_boot_addr,
+	.cpu_boot		= exynos4412_cpu_boot,
+	.suspend		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? exynos_suspend : NULL,
+	.resume			= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_resume : NULL,
+};
+
 static const struct firmware_ops exynos_firmware_ops = {
 	.do_idle		= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXYNOS_CPU_SUSPEND) ? exynos_do_idle : NULL,
 	.set_cpu_boot_addr	= exynos_set_cpu_boot_addr,
@@ -212,7 +257,12 @@  void __init exynos_firmware_init(void)
 
 	pr_info("Running under secure firmware.\n");
 
-	register_firmware_ops(&exynos_firmware_ops);
+	if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos3250"))
+		register_firmware_ops(&exynos3250_firmware_ops);
+	else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412"))
+		register_firmware_ops(&exynos4412_firmware_ops);
+	else
+		register_firmware_ops(&exynos_firmware_ops);
 
 	/*
 	 * Exynos 4 SoCs (based on Cortex A9 and equipped with L2C-310),