From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 16:02:59 +0530 From: Pratyush Anand Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 08/16] arm64/kexec: Add core kexec support Message-ID: <20151216103259.GA316@dhcppc13.redhat.com> References: <6ac232ad37d6b02cf2d5848b15236f26f5ac61ac.1448403503.git.geoff@infradead.org> <20151215182932.GF353@arm.com> <1450224870.24127.130.camel@infradead.org> <20151216071804.GI4674@dhcppc13.redhat.com> <56712F3A.7040805@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56712F3A.7040805@arm.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: James Morse Cc: Mark Rutland , Geoff Levand , Will Deacon , kexec@lists.infradead.org, AKASHI Takahiro , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Catalin Marinas , marc.zyngier@arm.com, christoffer.dall@linaro.org On 16/12/2015:09:30:34 AM, James Morse wrote: > On 16/12/15 07:18, Pratyush Anand wrote: > > We execute arm64_relocate_new_kernel() code with I-cache disabled. So, do we > > really need to invalidate I-cache? > > I got bitten by this, see Mark's earlier reply[0]: > > Mark Rutland wrote: > > The SCTLR_ELx.I only affects the attributes that the I-cache uses to > > fetch with, not whether it is enabled (it cannot be disabled > > architecturally). Thanks James for pointing to it. I had missed that. ~Pratyush _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec