On 05/19/2016 06:02 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> On 14 May 2016 at 15:41, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote:
>> On 05/14/2016 11:22 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>>> On 14 May 2016 at 14:23, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote:
>>>> On 05/14/2016 10:02 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>>>> Move these to debug() like the one in check_cache range(), to save SPL
>>>>> space.
>>>>
>>>> This hides cache problems, which were visibly reported so far.
>>>> I am opposed to this patch.
>>>
>>> Sure, but see check_cache_range(). It uses debug(). In fact I found
>>> the at91 cache problem only after trying #define DEBUG in the code
>>> there.
>>
>> Which is the reason we should really be vocal about such cache misuse.
>> I had a few of such cache problems bite me too, which is why I would
>> like to avoid silencing this warning with debug() by default.
>>
>> I think check_cache_range() should also be fixed and should use printf()
>> by default.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't it make more sense to completely disable printf() and co.
>>>> in SPL if you're after saving space?
>>>
>>> Or maybe we need something that prints a message in U-Boot proper, but
>>> not SPL? I'll take a look.
>>
>> But what if you trigger the issue only in SPL ?
>
> Yes, but is that likely? So far I don't think the cache is enabled in SPL...
Yeah, it's probably unlikely.
btw have you tried patching away all console IO support in SPL? Does it
save space?
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cache_v7.c | 8 ++++----
>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cache_v7.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cache_v7.c
>>>>> index dc309da..68cf62e 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cache_v7.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cache_v7.c
>>>>> @@ -66,8 +66,8 @@ static void v7_dcache_inval_range(u32 start, u32 stop,
>>>>> u32 line_len)
>>>>> * invalidate the first cache-line
>>>>> */
>>>>> if (start & (line_len - 1)) {
>>>>> - printf("ERROR: %s - start address is not aligned -
>>>>> 0x%08x\n",
>>>>> - __func__, start);
>>>>> + debug("ERROR: %s - start address is not aligned - 0x%08x\n",
>>>>> + __func__, start);
>>>>> /* move to next cache line */
>>>>> start = (start + line_len - 1) & ~(line_len - 1);
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -77,8 +77,8 @@ static void v7_dcache_inval_range(u32 start, u32 stop,
>>>>> u32 line_len)
>>>>> * invalidate the last cache-line
>>>>> */
>>>>> if (stop & (line_len - 1)) {
>>>>> - printf("ERROR: %s - stop address is not aligned - 0x%08x\n",
>>>>> - __func__, stop);
>>>>> + debug("ERROR: %s - stop address is not aligned - 0x%08x\n",
>>>>> + __func__, stop);
>>>>> /* align to the beginning of this cache line */
>>>>> stop &= ~(line_len - 1);
>>>>> }
>
> Regards,
> Simon
>
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
