From: alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com (Alexandre Belloni)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: at91: pm: switch to the PIE infrastructure
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 09:57:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160629075714.GP29249@piout.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2349417.jWuiI2GXql@ws-stein>
On 29/06/2016 at 08:12:21 +0200, Alexander Stein wrote :
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_V7)
> > + dsb();
> > + wfi();
> > +#else
> > + asm volatile ("mcr p15, 0, %0, c7, c0, 4" \
> > + : : "r" (0) : "memory");
> > +#endif
>
> Why not defining wfi() for __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ < 7 as it is done for dsb() and
> friends in arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h? So you can get rid of that #if
> completly.
Well, Russell said it was not useful because "there's no architected WFI
instruction which doesn't have CPU specific issues (hence why we have
cpu_do_idle() to abstract that)"
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
To: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: at91: pm: switch to the PIE infrastructure
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 09:57:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160629075714.GP29249@piout.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2349417.jWuiI2GXql@ws-stein>
On 29/06/2016 at 08:12:21 +0200, Alexander Stein wrote :
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_V7)
> > + dsb();
> > + wfi();
> > +#else
> > + asm volatile ("mcr p15, 0, %0, c7, c0, 4" \
> > + : : "r" (0) : "memory");
> > +#endif
>
> Why not defining wfi() for __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ < 7 as it is done for dsb() and
> friends in arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h? So you can get rid of that #if
> completly.
Well, Russell said it was not useful because "there's no architected WFI
instruction which doesn't have CPU specific issues (hence why we have
cpu_do_idle() to abstract that)"
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-29 7:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-28 22:44 [PATCH v2 0/2] Embedding Position Independent Executables Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ARM: PIE infrastructure Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: at91: pm: switch to the " Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-28 22:44 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-29 6:12 ` Alexander Stein
2016-06-29 6:12 ` Alexander Stein
2016-06-29 7:57 ` Alexandre Belloni [this message]
2016-06-29 7:57 ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-06-29 8:30 ` Alexander Stein
2016-06-29 8:30 ` Alexander Stein
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160629075714.GP29249@piout.net \
--to=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.