From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:22:26 +0000 Subject: cpu_vm_mask checks in ARM flush functions In-Reply-To: <20091024111036.GC16451@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20091024111036.GC16451@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <1256552546.5282.2.camel@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 12:10 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 09:03:16PM -0700, muni anda wrote: > > I was going though the cache flush functions in arch/arm/mm/flush.c > > and found that cpu_isset() is used at a lot of places. I couldn't > > understand the reason why there is a need for cpu_vm_mask checks? My > > understanding was that those functions will be executed on the CPU for > > which the cpu_mask is already set (in switch_mm call). Is there a > > different calling sequence that I am missing? [...] > For VIPT non-aliasing caches, there may be a bug there; it requires > more time than I currently have to think about to say for certain > though. Someone in ARM mentioned that setting breakpoints on ARM11MPCore doesn't always work. I gave them a patch with cpu_vm_mask check removed but they said it still doesn't work. I cannot guarantee that the fix doesn't work until I try it but I haven't had time for it yet. -- Catalin