tis 2013-05-21 klockan 14:26 +0200 skrev Wolfgang Denk:
> > but imho the user shouldn't really need to care for these and is why I
> > hooked into the go command.
>
> In this case you should use the common C API.
Unfortunately the go command do now know what range(s) it needs to
flush.
> No. b
Hi Kees,
On Tue, 21 May 2013 14:38:01 +0200, Kees Jongenburger
wrote:
> To my
> understanding also enabling d-cache on ARM has no effect as long as
> the MMU is not turned on so I totally miss the point.
Enabling dcache gives DDR access performance benefits regardless of
enabling MMU.
> Greeti
Hello,
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> Or maybe just punt it. If you are on an arch with incoherent caches then
> make sure to make use of the cache command to flush caches and maybe
> even disable caches before using go.
This is indeed the behaviour one would expect fr
Dear Kuo-Jung Su,
In message
you wrote:
>
> How about making the weak aliased arch_preboot_os() global, and then
> get it invoked
> in both bootm & go?
> It looks much pretty to me, and we don't even worry about the i-cache issues.
That would not really help as it would be architecure specific,
Dear Henrik Nordström,
In message <1368792981.765.21.camel@localhost> you wrote:
>
> > There is a common, architecture-independent C API that implements
> > cache flushing/invalidation; please re-read the summary at [1]
>
> Sorry I missed that discussion. Had a bit too much mail for a while.
No
2013/5/17 Henrik Nordström :
> fre 2013-05-17 klockan 00:13 +0200 skrev Wolfgang Denk:
>
>> There is a common, architecture-independent C API that implements
>> cache flushing/invalidation; please re-read the summary at [1]
>
> Sorry I missed that discussion. Had a bit too much mail for a while.
>
fre 2013-05-17 klockan 00:13 +0200 skrev Wolfgang Denk:
> There is a common, architecture-independent C API that implements
> cache flushing/invalidation; please re-read the summary at [1]
Sorry I missed that discussion. Had a bit too much mail for a while.
> > Or maybe just punt it. If you are
Dear Henrik,
In message <1368718669.25965.14.camel@localhost> you wrote:
>
> I do not like having these things arch specific. I implemented it as an
> ARMv7 hook only because there is no general cross-platform u-boot
> function for clearing the icache. I'd much rather have a generic
> function ca
tor 2013-05-16 klockan 09:37 -0400 skrev Tom Rini:
> That this topic keeps coming up is one of the reasons I asked Henrik to
> post this patch when I was looking over the Allwinner support queue. I
> thought this was a rather clever fixup.
For what it's worth a similar issue is also relevant to
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 09:14:06AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Henrik Nordstr??m,
>
> In message <1368669278.27007.43.camel@localhost> you wrote:
> >
> > > So my suggestion is to implement the icache_flush in common/bmmt_cmd.c
> > > as follows:
> ...
> > From what I can tell there is no ne
Dear Henrik Nordström,
In message <1368669278.27007.43.camel@localhost> you wrote:
>
> > So my suggestion is to implement the icache_flush in common/bmmt_cmd.c
> > as follows:
...
> From what I can tell there is no need to theck icache_status(). It's
> always safe to call invalidate_icache_all().
ons 2013-05-15 klockan 19:39 +0200 skrev Albert ARIBAUD:
> I understand all this, but what I am interested in is the root issue.
>
> IIUC, the problem is that some code is loaded in DDR, and the CPU is
> about to jump to it, but its instruction cache is enabled so maybe some
> instructions afte
Hi Tom,
On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:51:21 -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:44:10PM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Hi Henrik,
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2013 18:34:07 +0200, Henrik Nordstr??m
> > wrote:
> >
> > > ons 2013-05-15 klockan 17:11 +0200 skrev Albert ARIBAUD:
> > >
> > >
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:44:10PM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Henrik,
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2013 18:34:07 +0200, Henrik Nordstr??m
> wrote:
>
> > ons 2013-05-15 klockan 17:11 +0200 skrev Albert ARIBAUD:
> >
> > > What is the rationale behind putting it in arch/ rather than in common/
> > >
Hi Henrik,
On Wed, 15 May 2013 18:34:07 +0200, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> ons 2013-05-15 klockan 17:11 +0200 skrev Albert ARIBAUD:
>
> > What is the rationale behind putting it in arch/ rather than in common/
> > by adding this to the existing common/cmd_boot.c file under ARMv7
> > conditionals?
ons 2013-05-15 klockan 17:11 +0200 skrev Albert ARIBAUD:
> What is the rationale behind putting it in arch/ rather than in common/
> by adding this to the existing common/cmd_boot.c file under ARMv7
> conditionals?
Only because of what I said earlier: blindly calling
invalidate_icache_all() from
Hi Henrik,
On Tue, 14 May 2013 16:16:02 +0200, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> Tom Rini wanted me to post this again. There is no change from previous
> version.
>
> I do agree with Wolfgang Denk that this really SHOULD NOT be arch
> specific. The only reason why I made this ARMv7 specific is because
Tom Rini wanted me to post this again. There is no change from previous
version.
I do agree with Wolfgang Denk that this really SHOULD NOT be arch
specific. The only reason why I made this ARMv7 specific is because
blindly calling invalidate_icache_all() from the go command will cause
loud complai
18 matches
Mail list logo
