From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754427Ab1FOJDa (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 15 Jun 2011 05:03:30 -0400
Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.50]:40006 "EHLO
	cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754357Ab1FOJD3 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 15 Jun 2011 05:03:29 -0400
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:02:57 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mm: cache-l2x0: Add support for re-enabling l2x0
Message-ID: <20110615090257.GC31110@e102144-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <1307926019-28958-1-git-send-email-ccross@android.com>
 <20110613101942.GA7924@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <BANLkTingENSjDaE7O+Lb6P=ED4JtuJY1jkV25b3SW6RhsOQQkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110614173013.GA9234@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110614173013.GA9234@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi guys,

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 06:30:19PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 07:20:34PM +0100, Colin Cross wrote:
>
> According to the PL310 TRM (r3p2 3-9) on disable the PL310 syncs, which means
> it flushes internal buffers, but it is not supposed to clean dirty lines.
> It seems unsafe to me to use the stack and other cacheable data right before
> disabling.
> 
> > Otherwise, wouldn't a flush_cache_all() and l2x0_flush_all() in
> > l2x0_disable() ensure the stack lines were flushed out?  Probably
> > needs a readl_releaxed as well, to ensure the disable has taken
> > effect.
> > 
> 
> I reckon the safest option is to clean and disable in one C
> function. Moreover at that point in time spinlocks might not be an option
> anymore (CPU out of coherency), which makes those functions unusable.

I was planning to add this functionality as part of my kexec patches since
otherwise the l2x0_lock gets blown away on disable. I initially attributed
this to loss of coherency, but that's clearly not the case as I still had L1
running.

Colin - I'll add you to CC for v3 of that series.

Will