From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ilya Yanok Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 01:12:11 +0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 3/6] mcx: Disable DCACHE since USB EHCI is enabled In-Reply-To: <4FF35967.2050101@ti.com> References: <1340209283-3404-1-git-send-email-trini@ti.com> <201206290255.00088.marex@denx.de> <4FEF2176.3010301@emcraft.com> <201206302128.19828.marex@denx.de> <4FF35261.6070309@emcraft.com> <4FF35967.2050101@ti.com> Message-ID: <4FF3602B.6070102@emcraft.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Tom, 04.07.2012 00:43, Tom Rini wrote: > On 07/03/2012 01:13 PM, Ilya Yanok wrote: >> Dear Marek, >> >> 30.06.2012 23:28, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> Not exactly. It never worked (at least on my systems) with D-Cache >>>> enabled. But at least we had a choice of run-time disabled dcache. With >>>> the recent changes we have to disable cache support at compile time. >>> I see what you're after. But do you consider runtime disabling the >>> cache is the >>> way to go or it's a way of hiding bugs? >> Both ;) And now we are going to hide even more bugs with compile-time >> disabling :( > Does someone wish to argue we should disable USB support instead on > these platforms? I don't see anyone arguing "I have time to fix this > for v2012.07". I just looked at the code more carefully and it seems that most of the upper layers are in much better shape than I thought. So I think we should just extend your 2/6 patch to fix both address and size for structs QH and qtd and don't mess with buffer at all: if we got unaligned buffer -- it's definetely upper layer bug so we should produce some noise in this case. As I said upper layers seems to be in good shape so hopefully there won't be too much noise. Hm, probably we should put buffer invalidation under if(dcache_enabled()) to leave run-time cache disabling as rescue option for broken upper-layer code.. I'm working on the patch now and hopefully will post it this night. Regards, Ilya.