[PATCH 1/2] ARM: remove unneeded check of the cache_is_vipt_nonaliasing()

[catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)]

On 15 May 2011 15:48, saeed bishara <saeed.bishara@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Saeed Bishara <saeed@marvell.com> wrote:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Saeed Bishara <saeed@marvell.com>
>> ---
>> ?arch/arm/mm/flush.c | ? ?4 ++--
>> ?1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/flush.c b/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
>> index 2b269c9..f1b7998 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
>> @@ -253,8 +253,8 @@ void __sync_icache_dcache(pte_t pteval)
>>
>> ? ? ? ?if (!test_and_set_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags))
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?__flush_dcache_page(mapping, page);
>> - ? ? ? /* pte_exec() already checked above for non-aliasing VIPT cache */
>> - ? ? ? if (cache_is_vipt_nonaliasing() || pte_exec(pteval))
>> +
>> + ? ? ? if (pte_exec(pteval))
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?__flush_icache_all();
>> ?}
>> ?#endif
> can you have I a look at this patch?
> the __sync_icache_dcache() returns if (cache_is_vipt_nonaliasing() &&
> !pte_exec(pteval)), so later, the if (cache_is_vipt_nonaliasing() ||
> pte_exec(pteval)) should be equivalent to ?if (pte_exec(pteval))

Your patch looks fine - when cache_is_vipt_nonaliasing(), we always
have pte_exec() true at the end of this function, so no need for the
additional check.

Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>