From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?utf-8?Q?Beno=C3=AEt_Th=C3=A9baudeau?= <benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 20:49:11 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 4/4] arm: factorize relocate_code routine
In-Reply-To: <20130514205158.5f321534@lilith>
References: <1368223012-17609-1-git-send-email-albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
	<1368525030-5162-3-git-send-email-albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
	<1368525030-5162-4-git-send-email-albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
	<1368525030-5162-5-git-send-email-albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
	<1489195069.818131.1368547310358.JavaMail.root@advansee.com>
	<20130514183208.7075bd24@lilith>
	<790034962.819628.1368551866364.JavaMail.root@advansee.com>
	<20130514205158.5f321534@lilith>
Message-ID: <582404602.821126.1368557351096.JavaMail.root@advansee.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

Hi Albert,

On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 8:51:58 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Beno?t,
> 
> On Tue, 14 May 2013 19:17:46 +0200 (CEST), Beno?t Th?baudeau
> <benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Albert,
> > 
> > On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 6:32:08 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > > Hi Beno?t,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 14 May 2013 18:01:50 +0200 (CEST), Beno?t Th?baudeau
> > > <benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi Albert,
> > > 
> > > > >  	.globl	c_runtime_cpu_setup
> > > > >  c_runtime_cpu_setup:
> > > > >  
> > > > > -	bx	lr
> > > > > +	/*
> > > > > +	 * Unlock (actually, disable) the cache now that board_init_f
> > > > > +	 * is done. We could do this earlier but we would need to add
> > > > > +	 * a new C runtime hook, whereas c_runtime_cpu_setup already
> > > > > +	 * exists.
> > > > > +	 * As this routine is just a call to cpu_init_crit, let us
> > > > > +	 * tail-optimize and do a simple branch here.
> > > > > +	 */
> > > > > +	b	cpu_init_crit
> > > > 
> > > > Shouldn't the "#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_PXA25X" from the original code be kept
> > > > here?
> > > 
> > > Yes, it should indeed. Thanks for spotting this!
> > 
> > Have you seen the end of my notes for relocate.S? After all, keeping for
> > later
> > your patches moving to compiler-generated symbols seems to complicate
> > things and
> > to be more error-prone.
> 
> (that's unrelated to the PXA25X stuff above, right?)

Yes.

> I don't think deferring the compiler-generated symbols patches
> complicates things, as anyway, they would only apply after this
> patch (so as to apply only on a single instance of relocate_code) so
> there's no way they could simplify things occurring before them.
> 
> OTOH, they do simplify the code of relocate_code. That's why I put them
> in a separate series dealing with optimizing relocate_code. I'll post
> this second series right away, and let people decide whether both
> series should be merged in a single one.

Yes, this is what I meant.

Best regards,
Beno?t