[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <B256D81BAE5131468A838E5D7A243641BFD3A103@penmbx01>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 07:32:07 +0000
From: "Yang, Wenyou" <Wenyou.Yang@...el.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC: "Ferre, Nicolas" <Nicolas.FERRE@...el.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com"
<alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
"sylvain.rochet@...secur.com" <sylvain.rochet@...secur.com>,
"peda@...ntia.se" <peda@...ntia.se>,
"sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com"
<sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
"linux@...im.org.za" <linux@...im.org.za>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 3/3] pm: at91: add disable/enable the L1/L2 cache
while suspend/resume
Hi Russell,
Thank you very much for your suggestion.
I will redo this patch to use the cache helper functions ASAP.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell King - ARM Linux [mailto:linux@....linux.org.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 7:35 PM
> To: Yang, Wenyou
> Cc: Ferre, Nicolas; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com;
> sylvain.rochet@...secur.com; peda@...ntia.se;
> sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com; linux@...im.org.za
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] pm: at91: add disable/enable the L1/L2 cache while
> suspend/resume
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:24:04AM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * Clean and invalidate the L2 cache.
> > + * Common cache-l2x0.c functions can't be used here since it
> > + * uses spinlocks. We are out of coherency here with data cache
> > + * disabled. The spinlock implementation uses exclusive load/store
> > + * instruction which can fail without data cache being enabled.
> > + * Because of this, CPU can lead to deadlock.
>
> We really need to stop needing platforms to create their own L2 handling code.
> Please move this to a helper function in arch/arm/mm/l2c-l...-clean.S, replacing ...
> with the appropriate part for the code fragment.
>
> > + */
> > + ldr r1, at91_l2cc_base_addr
> > + ldr r2, [r1]
> > + cmp r2, #0
> > + beq skip_l2disable
> > + mov r0, #0xff
> > + str r0, [r2, #L2X0_CLEAN_INV_WAY]
> > +wait:
> > + ldr r0, [r2, #L2X0_CLEAN_INV_WAY]
> > + mov r1, #0xff
> > + ands r0, r0, r1
> > + bne wait
> > +
> > + mov r0, #0
> > + str r0, [r2, #L2X0_CTRL]
> > +
> > +l2x_sync:
> > + ldr r0, [r2, #L2X0_CACHE_SYNC]
> > + bic r0, r0, #0x1
> > + str r0, [r2, #L2X0_CACHE_SYNC]
>
> I wonder whether you've actually read the documentation for this. You don't need
> to read-modify-write this register. The C code doesn't even do this. A write to this
> register is sufficient - a write issues the sync, a read returns the completion status.
>
> > +sync:
> > + ldr r0, [r2, #L2X0_CACHE_SYNC]
> > + ands r0, r0, #0x1
> > + bne sync
>
> Moreover, do you actually need this - it depends on the L2C model. Only
> L2C220 needs to spin waiting for the sync operation to complete.
>
> Also, are you sure the "clean+invalidate, disable, sync" sequence is correct?
> Should it not be "clean+invalidate, sync, disable" ?
>
> --
> FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
> according to speedtest.net.
Best Regards,
Wenyou Yang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists