From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 17:11:20 +0200
Subject: [OpenRISC] [PATCH 31/31] module: move the set_fs hack for
 flush_icache_range to m68k
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdU_OxNoKfO=i903kx0mgk0-i2h4u2ase3m9_dn6oFh_5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200510075510.987823-1-hch@lst.de>
 <20200510075510.987823-32-hch@lst.de>
 <CAMuHMdU_OxNoKfO=i903kx0mgk0-i2h4u2ase3m9_dn6oFh_5g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200511151120.GA28634@lst.de>
List-Id: <openrisc.lists.librecores.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: openrisc@lists.librecores.org

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:40:39AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 9:57 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> >
> > flush_icache_range generally operates on kernel addresses, but for some
> > reason m68k needed a set_fs override.  Move that into the m68k code
> > insted of keeping it in the module loader.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>

Btw, do you know what part of flush_icache_range relied on set_fs?
Do any of the m68k maintainers have an idea how to handle that in
a nicer way when we can split the implementations?