On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 02:56:24PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 19.06.24 14:22, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
Hi Heinrich,
On Sun, 16 Jun 2024 at 20:31, Heinrich Schuchardt heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com wrote:
In EFI sub-system we rely on invalidate_icache_all() to invalidate the instruction cache after loading binaries. Add the missing implementation on ARM1136, ARM1176.
Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com
arch/arm/cpu/arm11/cpu.c | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm11/cpu.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm11/cpu.c index 01d2e1a125d..4bf0446b543 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm11/cpu.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm11/cpu.c @@ -116,3 +116,15 @@ void enable_caches(void) #endif } #endif
+#if !CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SYS_ICACHE_OFF) +/* Invalidate entire I-cache */ +void invalidate_icache_all(void) +{
unsigned long i = 0;asm ("mcr p15, 0, %0, c7, c5, 0" : : "r" (i));This looks correct, but can't we define it as __asm__("mcr p15, 0, %0, c7, c5, 0" : : "r" (0)); ?
Both compile to the same code. So we should simplify the expression.
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cache_v7.c and other modules always uses asm and not __asm__.
@Tom: Can we specify what is preferred in doc/develop/codingstyle.rst?
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Alternate-Keywords.html gives some background.
Sure.