> > Current flush_cache code does > > > > 1. clean the dcache with dcbst, but not invalidate dcache > > 2. invalidate icache > > > > This patch use the dcbf instead of dcbst to have stronger > > semantic, clean the dcache and invalidate dcache. > > On which processors did you test the changes? I have some unclear > memories of dcbf having problems on for example MPC8xx ?
on 83xx parts. I remember the 601 processor not support the dcbf. > > We have two options: > > > > 1. Separate functions for them like linux kernel. > > A. clean dcache (dcbst) for DMA_TO_DEVICE > > B. invalidate dcache (dcbi) for DMA_FROM_DEVICE > > C. flush dcache (dcbf) for DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL. > > 2. Make current flush_cache stronger semanctic. > > use the dcbf instead of dcbst. > > > > Which one is better? or you have better option? > > Please suggest. > > We discussed this a bit on IRC; Kumar suggested to go for 1., and I > agree. Where is the IRC? Could you point it to me? Thanks, Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
