From: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com>

This adds the necessary modeling to support some of our firmware
tests at EL3 implementing PSCI (TBM). These are the test-cases
that were previously relying on QEMU's builtin PSCI emulation.

Cheers,
Edgar

ChangeLog:

v2 -> v3:
* Make RVBAR_ELx register reflect updated rvbar
* Sample rvbar prop at reset
* Remove setting of minimum_version_id_old
* Use OBJECT_DECLARE_SIMPLE_TYPE

v1 -> v2:
* crf: Change APU_MAX_CPU to CRF_MAX_CPU
* crf: Remove empty interfaces
* crf: Add include guards
* apu-ctrl: Change NUM_CPUS to APU_MAX_CPU
* apu-ctrl: Fix indentation
* apu-ctrl: Remove empty interfaces 
* apu-ctrl: Add include guards 
* xlnx-zynqmp: Add comment clarifying SER/DESerializer

Edgar E. Iglesias (6):
  hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp: Add an unimplemented SERDES area
  target/arm: Make rvbar settable after realize
  hw/misc: Add a model of the Xilinx ZynqMP CRF
  hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp: Connect the ZynqMP CRF
  hw/misc: Add a model of the Xilinx ZynqMP APU Control
  hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp: Connect the ZynqMP APU Control

 include/hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.h           |   4 +
 include/hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-apu-ctrl.h |  93 +++++++++
 include/hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-crf.h      | 211 ++++++++++++++++++++
 target/arm/cpu.h                       |   3 +-
 hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c                   |  46 ++++-
 hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-apu-ctrl.c         | 253 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-crf.c              | 266 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 target/arm/cpu.c                       |  12 +-
 target/arm/helper.c                    |  10 +-
 hw/misc/meson.build                    |   2 +
 10 files changed, 889 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 include/hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-apu-ctrl.h
 create mode 100644 include/hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-crf.h
 create mode 100644 hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-apu-ctrl.c
 create mode 100644 hw/misc/xlnx-zynqmp-crf.c

-- 
2.25.1

On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 16:46, Edgar E. Iglesias
<edgar.iglesias@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com>
>
> This adds the necessary modeling to support some of our firmware
> tests at EL3 implementing PSCI (TBM). These are the test-cases
> that were previously relying on QEMU's builtin PSCI emulation.

I wouldn't usually take patches new devices after softfreeze, but
on the other hand this is addressing a regression, and it only
affects the xilinx boards. Do you have a view on whether we should put
this into 7.0 or defer to 7.1 ?

thanks
-- PMM

On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 8:15 PM Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
wrote:

> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 16:46, Edgar E. Iglesias
> <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com>
> >
> > This adds the necessary modeling to support some of our firmware
> > tests at EL3 implementing PSCI (TBM). These are the test-cases
> > that were previously relying on QEMU's builtin PSCI emulation.
>
> I wouldn't usually take patches new devices after softfreeze, but
> on the other hand this is addressing a regression, and it only
> affects the xilinx boards. Do you have a view on whether we should put
> this into 7.0 or defer to 7.1 ?
>
>
Hi Peter,

I'd lean slightly towards 7.0 (to allow our tests to pass cleanly on 7.0)
but it's not of huge importance.

Thanks,
Edgar

On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 at 19:21, Edgar E. Iglesias
<edgar.iglesias@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 8:15 PM Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 16:46, Edgar E. Iglesias
>> <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > From: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com>
>> >
>> > This adds the necessary modeling to support some of our firmware
>> > tests at EL3 implementing PSCI (TBM). These are the test-cases
>> > that were previously relying on QEMU's builtin PSCI emulation.
>>
>> I wouldn't usually take patches new devices after softfreeze, but
>> on the other hand this is addressing a regression, and it only
>> affects the xilinx boards. Do you have a view on whether we should put
>> this into 7.0 or defer to 7.1 ?

> I'd lean slightly towards 7.0 (to allow our tests to pass cleanly on 7.0)
> but it's not of huge importance.

Yeah, I agree -- I'll queue this into target-arm.next for 7.0.

thanks
-- PMM