From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert ARIBAUD Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 07:30:35 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC] command/cache: Add flush_cache command In-Reply-To: <1363898082.31522.22@snotra> References: <20130321192510.7C892200547@gemini.denx.de> <1363898082.31522.22@snotra> Message-ID: <20130322073035.66674cf5@lilith> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Scott, > Perhaps it could be, or the application could be altered to release > secondary cores through the spin table. I don't think that excuses a > situation where some ways of putting a blob of bytes into RAM flush the > cache (to the extent the architecture requires it for the blob of bytes > to be executable) and others don't, and there's no way to do it > manually. AFAIU there is. > Would you remove the "go" command entirely? I think that > would be a mistake. I do not see why you are talking about removing the "go" command. In the 'worst' scenario (from an effort perspective), it would have to be do a flush and possibly cache disable before branching to the payload; in the 'best' scenario, it needs not be modified at all. > -Scott Amicalement, -- Albert.