Hi Benoît,
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com wrote:
Hi Albert,
On Monday, September 3, 2012 6:50:14 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Hi Benoît,
On Mon, 3 Sep 2012 16:25:15 +0200 (CEST), Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com wrote:
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
On Sunday, September 2, 2012 6:30:23 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Benoît Thébaudeau,
In message 1725235724.2300239.1344694624384.JavaMail.root@advansee.com you wrote:
On 08/11/2012 05:18 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
...
if you want dcache disabled, then why don't you run `dcache off` first ? i think it's useful to be able to do both, and forcing it one way is wrong.
thus, NAK from me. -mike
Because you will very likely trust mtest and forget about running `dcache off` first, so you may then be happy about falsely positive mtest results. Moreover, I can't find any sense or usefulness in running mtest with dcache enabled.
I agree with Mike.
"UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things." - Doug Gwyn
So NAK from me, too.
OK, but do you agree with the following that Mike and me agreed on after that? http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-August/130650.html http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-August/130726.html http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/176909/
I did already reply to this, but since the agreement is brought back, I think I should re-state my opinion: such a warning line will most likely be overlooked, thus has little value. People using mtest should know that they must check/set dcache state before running mtest.
If this line is overlooked, it's the same as not having it. If it is not overlooked, it is useful both to detail the test conditions and as a reminder not to do stupid things. This line does not prevent users from doing any manual dcache check/enable/disable operation they want before running mtest. All in all, adding this line can only be beneficial.
I agree - particularly when somebody else is looking at the output (on the ML for example) and notices it.
I'm also inclined to not 100% trust dcache operations (we all know that cache support is in a state of flux) so something like:
# dcache on # mtest 0x80100000 0x90000000 0xaabb
If you get back:
Testing 0x80100000 ... 0x90000000 (dcache: off):
You know something is wrong with the dcache on implementation
Regards,
Graeme