On Sunday 09 October 2011 06:41:47 Ilya Yanok wrote:
> On 07.10.2011 21:34, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> +#ifdef DAVINCI_EMAC_DCACHE
> >> +static inline void davinci_flush(void *addr, int size)
> >> +{
> >> + flush_dcache_range((unsigned long)addr,
> >> + (unsigned long)addr + size);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static inline void davinci_invalidate(void *addr, int size)
> >> +{
> >> + invalidate_dcache_range((unsigned long)addr,
> >> + (unsigned long)addr + size);
> >> +}
> >> +#else
> >> +#define davinci_flush(addr, size) do {} while (0)
> >> +#define davinci_invalidate(addr, size) do {} while (0)
> >> +#endif
> >
> > does it really make sense to have this be conditional ?
>
> arm926ejs doesn't have {invalidate,flush}_dcache_range(), so we have to
> add this not to break the driver on DaVinci boards (maybe we need to add
> empty cache functions on arm926ejs instead?)if the prototype is in include/common.h, then code may assume it exists. if it doesn't exist for a particular cpu, then that cpu is broken and common code (which is what drivers/ is) should not be adding hacks to workaround broken cpus. please add stubs to the cpu you're referring to and drop the DAVINCI_EMAC_DCACHE define. or let whoever cares about that cpu add the defines, but still drop DAVINCI_EMAC_DCACHE. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
