[PATCH v4] ARM: cache-l2x0: add resume entry for l2 in secure mode

[linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)]

On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 11:57:03AM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 04:06:46PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:42:53AM -0700, Barry Song wrote:
> > > From: Barry Song <Baohua.Song@csr.com>
> > > 
> > > we save the l2x0 registers at the first initialization, and platform codes
> > > can get them to restore l2x0 status after wakeup.
> > > 
> > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Barry Song <Baohua.Song@csr.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
> > > Tested-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>
> > 
> > This looks fine, thanks Barry.
> > 
> > The one remaining issue is whether we use this or use Lorenzo's patches.
> > I feel that Barry's version is a lot simpler and easier to use, so this
> > is my preference.  Anyone else got another opinion between the two?
> > 
> 
> Basically the two patches do the same thing except that Barry's generic
> resume code cannot be called before the MMU is turned on. On the other hand
> Barry's patch is certainly simpler to maintain and I think it should be 
> merged, preference shared; I would not say it is easier to use though, usage 
> is identical.
> 
> It is agreed, better to have it in C than in asm for maintenance reasons, 
> asm can turn out overkill.
> If there is a compelling case for generic L2 asm we can always add it at a 
> later stage (at least Origen, latest iMX and I think Tegra will need early L2
> resume from idle).

Ok, so it sounds like we're settled on Barry's code... so can it head to
the patch system please?