On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 04:20:42PM -0700, Alex Van Brunt wrote: > Add a comment that clairfies how the kernel should behave given the cache
clarifies > policy reported by the CPU. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Van Brunt <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c > index ae04ac1..bf7e5e2 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c > @@ -49,6 +49,14 @@ static void cpuinfo_detect_icache_policy(struct > cpuinfo_arm64 *info) > unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id(); > u32 l1ip = CTR_L1IP(info->reg_ctr); > > + /* > + * The ARM architecture defines PIPT, VIPT and AIVIVT in terms of the -the > + * the observable behavior not how the CPU implements the policy. s/not/rather than/ > + * Specifically, the policies differentiate the correct way to > + * invalidate the cache. The definitions say that the only > + * architecturally guaranteed way to invalidate a VIPT or AIVIVT > + * instruction cache is to invalidate the entire instruction cache. > + */ > if (l1ip != ICACHE_POLICY_PIPT) > set_bit(ICACHEF_ALIASING, &__icache_flags); > if (l1ip == ICACHE_POLICY_AIVIVT) With the minor cosmetic changes: Acked-by: Will Deacon <[email protected]> although I don't see how we can really apply this given that we're not planning to revert the cache geometry stuff. Maybe you could spin a separate series just addressing the aliasing I-cache detection, then we can build on top of that? Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
