From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 20:30:12 +0100 Subject: I-cache/D-cache inconsistency issue with page cache In-Reply-To: References: <20110923115721.GA7013@glandium.org> <20110923193941.GQ17169@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110924093544.GA5724@glandium.org> <20110924094734.GC17169@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110925103445.GA22455@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20110925193012.GC22455@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 04:26:42PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On 25 September 2011 11:34, Russell King - ARM Linux > wrote: > > As I've already pointed out though, the report is against old kernels > > which doesn't have this code, so there's no point us speculating about > > it until the issue has been confirmed against a kernel which we expect > > _not_ to have the issue in the first place (rather than one which we > > _do_ expect it to go wrong.) > > Yes, they should definitely try a more recent kernel. As the kernels which have been reported as having the issue do not have __sync_icache_dcache, all bets are off for things behaving correctly. I don't see any point speculating further until the problem is confirmed on a kernel _with_ __sync_icache_dcache.