Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932773AbbELMmS (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2015 08:42:18 -0400 Received: from mail02.rohde-schwarz.com ([80.246.32.97]:63527 "EHLO mail02.rohde-schwarz.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932314AbbELMmP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2015 08:42:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <5551A2C8.1070803@xilinx.com> References: <812979c5a158a3306d8036e7f9731947c58a3ab7.1431411716.git.michal.simek@xilinx.com> <55519E47.7040008@de.bosch.com> <5551A2C8.1070803@xilinx.com> To: michal.simek@xilinx.com Cc: Dirk Behme , Josh Cartwright , Russell King , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, monstr@monstr.eu, Peter Crosthwaite , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F6ren_Brinkmann?= , Steffen Trumtrar MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: zynq: Set bit 22 in PL310 AuxCtrl register (6395/1) X-KeepSent: 5BDDADA7:8131210F-C1257E43:00444460; type=4; flags=0; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.3FP5 August 01, 2013 From: Thomas.Betker@rohde-schwarz.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 14:42:02 +0200 X-RUS_SENSITIVITY: 10 X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on RSSMTP02/RSSMTP at 12.05.2015 14:42:06, Serialize by Router on RSSMTP02/RSSMTP at 12.05.2015 14:42:14, Serialize complete at 12.05.2015 14:42:14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1464 Lines: 40 > >> This patch is based on the > >> commit 1a8e41cd672f ("ARM: 6395/1: VExpress: Set bit 22 in the PL310 > >> (cache controller) AuxCtlr register") > > > > > > I've been under the impression that this shouldn't be done in the > > kernel, but in the boot loader/firmware: > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/20/199 > > > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-March/207803.html > > Tegra, Exynos, sti still have this bit set. In 4.1-rc3, the bit is set by berlin, exynos, nomadik, omap2, sti, tegra, vexpress. > Does that mean that they should be just removed because fix should be in > bootloader? > > Anyway it is normal that bootloader stay on system untouched and only OS > is updated. But OK - let's make this in bootloader if this is preferred > solution. So the plan is to update each and every Zynq bootloader for a problem we have encountered in Linux (in our case, a problem we have been hunting for months)? My u-boot doesn't even use the cache; it's disabled until the kernel boots. I do understand that the kernel should not overwrite hardwired settings such as cache size, but shouldn't we at least allow to fix things that definitely need to be fixed? Best regards, Thomas Betker -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/