[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm_cortexa8: support cache flush to other soc

[Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@googlemail.com>]

Tom wrote:
> Minkyu Kang wrote:
>> Dear Dirk,
>>
>>
> <snip>
> 
> I have lost track of this thread.

Yes, and I'm currently trying to get the track back ;)

> When last I worked this, it seemed like the cache routines were going to
> be split.
> 
> 1. generic cache routines
> 2. legacy soc cache routines.
> 
> Are the generic cache routines in place and can you use them?
> Else can you handle your soc specific cache routines as part of a
> legacy cache routine ?
> 
> The omap cache routines are dependent on omap rom code and fitting
> new routines in using the omap specifics may not be the best way to
> go.

I'm sure this is not the perfect way, but it seems to me that 
splitting all this stuff into several small steps would be the easier 
for all. E.g.

1) From the previous discussion I think we should apply

http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-August/058492.html

Independent of any discussion if this code is needed at all, if it is 
generic or not etc. the main advantage I understood is that it frees 
the way for Samsung.

2a) Then, what I understood from Minkyu, we need an additional patch 
(discussion?) how to switch CONFIG_L2_OFF from compile time to run 
time selection (for Samsung's multi board support)

2b) Then, what I understood from Minkyu, we should discuss about 
removal of get_device_type() function

3) In parallel, we should discuss how to further improve the OMAP3 
cache stuff. What might be generic, what not, what isn't necessary etc.

4) Regarding (cache) code duplication, I vote for doing this 
duplication first. That is, have working Samsung and OMAP3 code 
applied in parallel. While Jean-Christophe might cry "code 
duplication", I learned from OMAP3 boards that is was easier to unify 
common code _after_ code duplication was done and therefore can be 
easily identified. Discussing about possible code duplication without 
being able to see (and test) the code is sometimes a little tricky ;)

As mentioned, doing this in several, small steps I feel more 
comfortable with. If we would have done step (1) already, it's my 
feeling that we would have reached step 2 or 3 already. But now, we 
are still discussing about the 'one big perfect patch'.

Best regards

Dirk