From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0131.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 636871A04B3 for ; Thu, 14 May 2015 10:49:40 +1000 (AEST) Message-ID: <1431564565.3868.157.camel@freescale.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Partially revert "powerpc: Remove duplicate cacheable_memcpy/memzero functions" From: Scott Wood To: Christophe Leroy Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 19:49:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , Kyle Moffett , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 15:32 +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > This partially reverts > commit 'powerpc: Remove duplicate cacheable_memcpy/memzero functions > ("f909a35bdfb7cb350d078a2cf888162eeb20381c")' I don't have that SHA. Do you mean b05ae4ee602b7dc90771408ccf0972e1b3801a35? > Functions cacheable_memcpy/memzero are more efficient than > memcpy/memset as they use the dcbz instruction which avoids refill > of the cacheline with the data that we will overwrite. I don't see anything in this patchset that addresses the "NOTE: The old routines are just flat buggy on kernels that support hardware with different cacheline sizes" comment. -Scott