On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 04:46:36PM +0000, Leif Lindholm wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 04:00:51PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > With the two call sites in uefi_phys.S as: > > > > > > > > > > ldr r5, =(CR_M) > > > > > update_sctlr r12, , r5 > > > > > and > > > > > ldr r4, =(CR_I | CR_C | CR_M) > > > > > update_sctlr r12, r4 > > > > > > > > These ldr= could be movs, right? > > > > > > The first one could. > > > The second one could be movw on armv7+. > > > > > > > If so, I definitely prefer this to putting an ldr = into the macro > > > > itself > > > > (option 2). > > > > > > And your preference between 1) and 2) is? > > > > (1), using bic and mov[tw] where possible. > > (1): ok, thanks. > > bic: sure, that was an oversight. > > mov[tw]: why? > Then we end up battling different available immediate fields in A32/T32 > instruction sets and v5/v6/v7 architecture versions.
I was making the assumption that UEFI was going to be v7 only... is this not true? Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
