On Wednesday 10 August 2011 11:41 PM, Anton Staaf wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Aneesh V wrote:
>> Hi Anton,
>>
>> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 10:09 PM, Anton Staaf wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the larger context of this change is, but it seems
>>> like a bad idea to me. There are a
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Aneesh V wrote:
> Hi Anton,
>
> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 10:09 PM, Anton Staaf wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what the larger context of this change is, but it seems
>> like a bad idea to me. There are a lot of locations in U-Boot that
>
> Please see this thread for t
Hi Anton,
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 10:09 PM, Anton Staaf wrote:
> I'm not sure what the larger context of this change is, but it seems
> like a bad idea to me. There are a lot of locations in U-Boot that
Please see this thread for the context.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-b
Hi Anton,
Le 09/08/2011 18:39, Anton Staaf a écrit :
> I'm not sure what the larger context of this change is, but it seems
> like a bad idea to me. There are a lot of locations in U-Boot that
> will end up causing an unaligned invalidate (ext2 and dos file system
> code in particular). And this
I'm not sure what the larger context of this change is, but it seems
like a bad idea to me. There are a lot of locations in U-Boot that
will end up causing an unaligned invalidate (ext2 and dos file system
code in particular). And this change will cause those unaligned
invalidates to possibly thr
Remove the flush of boundary cache-lines done as part
of invalidate on a non cache-line boundary aligned
buffer
Also, print a warning when this situation is recognized.
Signed-off-by: Aneesh V
---
V2:
New in V2
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cache_v7.c | 14 --
arch/arm/lib/cache-pl310.c
6 matches
Mail list logo
