public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aneesh V <aneesh@ti.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/8] armv7: cache maintenance operations for armv7
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:26:04 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D2A9164.5020107@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110109224143.0E98E150A44@gemini.denx.de>

Dear Wolfgang,

On Monday 10 January 2011 04:11 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Albert ARIBAUD,
>
> In message<4D286F58.9010605@free.fr>  you wrote:
>>
>> I know we consider multi-board u-boot binaries when boards are variant
>> of a given SoC, that's one reason why we wanted relocation. I'm not sure
>> about multi-SoC when SoC is a variant of a given cpu, though. Wolfgang,
>> your opinion?
>
> Unless we see a specific example which uses this feature, we should
> not add provisions that make the code more complicated than needed.

Agree. But do you think the pointer based approach makes it overly
complex?

>
> And when we start supporting such a feature, we should probably do
> this based on a device tree approach.
>
>>> Although this function is non-empty, flush_dcache_range() is in turn
>>> empty. Effect will be the same, right?
>>
>> Yes the effect is the same, but your patch results in a non-trivially
>> empty function; I'd prefer it to be visibly empty when we compile
>> without cache support.
>
> Yes, that's my opinion, too.

Agree.

>
>
>> Just because Linux uses armv7-a for a v7 arch does not mean we must have
>> it for u-boot. For starters, U-boot does not always boot Linux. :)
>>
>> As for out-dated compilers, that's the question I'm asking: do we
>> consider e.g. ELDK 4.2 as outdated or not? It won't accept armv7-a.
>
> That's a catch question.
>
> Yes, ELDK 4.2 is outdated.  But it is still one of the most stable
> versions of a tool chain known to me, especially when it comes to
> using the very same tool versions across several architectures.
>
> I cannot see any benefits of this code change that would justiify such
> a breakage.

Agree. The only benefit is that I can use some memory barrier
instructions without hand-coding the respective machine instructions.
But that can be done if it helps avoiding compiler breakage.

>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-10  4:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-12-22 11:54 [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/8] armv7: cache maintenance operations Aneesh V
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/8] arm: make default implementation of cache_flush() weakly linked Aneesh V
2011-01-08  6:40   ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/8] armv7: cache maintenance operations for armv7 Aneesh V
2011-01-08  6:36   ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-08  8:40     ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-08 10:06     ` Aneesh V
2011-01-12 19:18       ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-13 11:10         ` Aneesh V
2011-01-13 12:14         ` Aneesh V
2011-01-13 17:12           ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-08 13:17     ` Aneesh V
2011-01-08 14:06       ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-09 22:41         ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-10  4:56           ` Aneesh V [this message]
2011-01-17 21:47             ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-12  9:08         ` Aneesh V
2011-01-12 19:23           ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-13 12:05             ` Aneesh V
2011-01-13 13:14               ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-13 14:30                 ` Aneesh V
2011-01-13 17:06                   ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-03-01 11:54     ` Aneesh V
2011-03-01 13:36       ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/8] armv7: integrate cache maintenance support Aneesh V
2011-01-08  6:54   ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-08  8:15     ` Aneesh V
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/8] arm: minor fixes for cache and mmu handling Aneesh V
2011-01-08  7:04   ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-08  9:13     ` Aneesh V
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 5/8] armv7: add PL310 support to u-boot Aneesh V
2011-01-09 22:48   ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-10 13:41     ` Aneesh V
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 6/8] armv7: adapt omap4 to the new cache maintenance framework Aneesh V
2011-01-09 22:52   ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-10 14:33     ` Aneesh V
2011-01-17 21:52       ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 7/8] armv7: adapt omap3 " Aneesh V
2011-01-09 22:57   ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-10 14:41     ` Aneesh V
2011-01-17 21:55       ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-18  5:31         ` Aneesh V
2011-01-18  9:23           ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-12-22 11:54 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 8/8] armv7: adapt s5pc1xx " Aneesh V
2010-12-27  7:25   ` Minkyu Kang
2010-12-27 11:22     ` Aneesh V
2011-01-07  5:27       ` Minkyu Kang
2010-12-23  4:53 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/8] armv7: cache maintenance operations Steve Sakoman
2010-12-28 19:51 ` Paulraj, Sandeep
2011-01-08  7:07   ` Albert ARIBAUD

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4D2A9164.5020107@ti.com \
    --to=aneesh@ti.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox