From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 19:07:29 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: Generic cache ops skeleton
In-Reply-To: <201111061303.12677.vapier@gentoo.org>
References: <1320542183-20309-1-git-send-email-marek.vasut@gmail.com>
	<201111061339.56345.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
	<201111061303.12677.vapier@gentoo.org>
Message-ID: <201111061907.30014.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

> On Sunday 06 November 2011 07:39:56 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On Saturday 05 November 2011 21:16:23 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > This patch should allow a CPU to register it's own cache ops. This
> > > > shall allow multiple CPUs with different cache handlings to be
> > > > supported.
> > > 
> > > sorry, what's the point ?  this would make sense if you wanted to build
> > > one u- boot image to run on multiple SoCs, but since that doesn't make
> > > sense, i don't see what this patch gets you.
> > 
> > Well that's the ultimate goal, isn't it ...
> 
> is it actually ?  i must have missed the memo.
> 
> support for multiple-SoC-support-in-a-single-image shouldn't bloat the
> single SoC case.  this code seems to do just that.  so it sounds like you
> should find a CONFIG name for this setup and start putting everything
> behind that.

That's a good point indeed. The other question is, if gcc4.6's LTO won't fix 
that for us. Surely enough though, we can't rely on that.
> 
> maybe something like CONFIG_SYS_MULTI_SOC.

Yea

> -mike

M