Am 2015-03-12 um 13:28 schrieb Tom Rini:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 08:34:34AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Am 2015-03-11 um 16:11 schrieb Tom Rini:
On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 08:00:11AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
This is already invoked a few cycles later in monitor mode by _secure_monitor. Drop it here, it serves no purpose.
For clarity, because of the vector tables?
Sorry, didn't get the question yet. Are you asking why it was added initially (that would be a question for Marc) or why it serves no purpose now?
You're saying we can drop the call to that function from where it was because it's called a few cycles later. In mainline we would only (as far as I can see) call the function because the CPU went to the vector table and called it that way.
Or rather, I'm unclear as to how the function would be called a few cycles later, can you please expand the commit message to make it clearer? Thanks!
Yeah, the call chain continues like this: _sunxi_cpu_entry calls _do_nonsec_entry which which triggers via smc #0 _secure_monitor, and there we have the second invocation. There is no alternative path. Better?
Jan