On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 11:49:54 AM, Josh Wu wrote: > On 6/9/2015 9:11 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:54:14AM +0800, Josh Wu wrote: > >> Hi, Tom > >> > >> On 6/8/2015 9:20 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 10:26:29AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>> On Monday, June 08, 2015 at 04:05:04 AM, Josh Wu wrote: > >>>>> Hi, Marek > >>>>> > >>>>> On 6/5/2015 9:18 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>>>> On Friday, June 05, 2015 at 09:47:30 AM, Josh Wu wrote: > >>>>>>> Since some driver like ohci, lcd used dcache functions. But some > >>>>>>> ARM cpu don't implement the > >>>>>>> invalidate_dcache_range()/flush_dcache_range() functions. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> To avoid compiling errors this patch adds an weak empty stub > >>>>>>> function for all ARM cpu. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> And each cpu can implement its own implementation. If not > >>>>>>> implemented by default it will use an empty function. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Josh Wu <josh...@atmel.com> > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Changes in v2: new added > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> arch/arm/lib/cache.c | 9 +++++++++ > >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So, why exactly can't this be entirely common code , but a > >>>>>> CPU-specific code ? :) > >>>>> > >>>>> Do you mean to make those empty functions as common code for all arch > >>>>> cpu to use? > >>>> > >>>> Yes. > >>>> > >>>>> It seems there is no place to put common code for all arch cpu. > >>>> > >>>> Isn't that what the common/ directory is for ? ;-) > >>> > >>> No, this is making something common for the sake of making it common > >>> rather than good architecutre of the code I think. We aren't going to > >>> share real cache functions just these dummy ones. > >> > >> So it is the right place: arch/arm/lib/cache.c to put the dummy > >> cache function. > > > > Yes. > > > >>> We may re-evaluate > >>> our dummy ones at some point in the future when people try and use some > >>> particular combination harder, see for example the PowerPC dummy cache > >>> functions we just recently dropped. Thanks! > >> > >> If this patch set are ok for you. I will sent more patches to drop > >> the dummy cache functions in <arch>/cpu/ folders. > > > > Right, that's the best palce I think, baring an existing arch having a > > location for weak cache functions already (like arm does). > > > >> Also the flush_cache() in arch/arm/lib/cache.c can be dropped and > >> just call flush_dcache_range() as the ARM1136, ARM926ejs alreay > >> implemented their own flush_cache(). > > > > Nope, other things fail if you do that (vpac270_nor_256 and 24 others at > > least so far in my test build). > > Does it fail to compile or on running? As I don't have the board to test > the binary, but I don't find any compile error when I apply such a patch. > Maybe it is better to sent out my patch for you to check.
VPAC is PXA270 and to my knowledge, PXA has no cache support in place at all. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
