On Apr 7, 2013, at 1:29 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear sun york-R58495, > > In message > <c707e9f4d8007146bf8dc1424b113ac70b3a4...@039-sn2mpn1-012.039d.mgd.msft.net> > you wrote: >> >>> Can we not split this into: >>> >>> dcache flush >>> icache invalidate >>> >>> ? This would make clear what's happening. >> >> >> The idea is to reuse existing code with minimum addition. For the applicati >> ons concerned, these two steps are both needed. Splitting them doesn't make >> things easier. > > Reusing code is a Good Thing, but not when it comes at the cost of > obfucating what the code actually does. > >> If I have to use existing command, I'd rather to put these two steps under >> icache invalide <addr> <size>. > > No, this is not acceptable. The "icache" command deals with the IC > only, it must not meddle with the data cache (like flushing it). >
I think it is best to keep this patch as it and stick with the original flush_cache name. It uses the existing function flush_cache() which is available for most (if not all) architectures. Splitting the dcache and icache not only adds more code, but architecture-dependent code. York _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
