From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:02:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:46973 "EHLO linux-mips.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S6861528Ab3IQQCWJhBI- (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:02:22 +0200 Received: from scotty.linux-mips.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by scotty.linux-mips.net (8.14.7/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8HG2Kbo001174; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:02:20 +0200 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by scotty.linux-mips.net (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id r8HG2JZX001173; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:02:19 +0200 Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:02:19 +0200 From: Ralf Baechle To: Markos Chandras Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Fix accessing to per-cpu data when flushing the cache Message-ID: <20130917160219.GF22468@linux-mips.org> References: <1379411005-20829-1-git-send-email-markos.chandras@imgtec.com> <20130917104431.GB22468@linux-mips.org> <5238353B.9050001@imgtec.com> <20130917114356.GE22468@linux-mips.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130917114356.GE22468@linux-mips.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 37834 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 01:43:56PM +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > >I'd prefer if we change the caller otherwise depending on the platform > > >a single cache flush might involve several preempt_disable/-enable > > >invocations. Something like below. > > > > > >And it also keeps the header file more usable outside the core kernel > > >which Florian's recent zboot a little easier. > > > > > > > Hi Ralf, > > > > Changing the caller instead of the function in the header file looks > > good to me. Thanks for fixing it. > > I think in the end the patch below is the better way of fixing it. No, it's not. Most systems have identical caches for all processors in a system but there are exceptions, so my first patch is the right one. Ralf