Hi Tolunay,
On Saturday 10 February 2007 08:57, Tolunay Orkun wrote:
I would not do this. Please let a "sync" instruction _not_ do a "isync" too.
There will be times when you explicitly _don't_ what this.
Could you give a specific example.
The "isync" will reload the TLB's on 440's for example and sometimes you really don't want this on a "normal" sync instruction.
There is also "eieio" and "msync" to consider though these usually map to former two (or vice versa).
Yes. But I find the name "sync" more platform generic.
Why not use
#define sync() __asm__ __volatile__ ("sync" : : : "memory");
from include/asm-ppc/io.h? This seems to be exactly what we need.
I would rather prefer an uppercase SYNC since it is a macro but whatever style you guys choose is OK with me.
Could be that on other platforms this sync is not a define but a function. But I don't have a strong preference here. Wolfgang, you decide. ;-)
Best regards, Stefan
===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, HRB 165235 Munich, CEO: Wolfgang Denk Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany =====================================================================