Hi, On 4 May 2018 at 01:12, Emmanuel Vadot <m...@bidouilliste.com> wrote: > On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 10:37:50 +0200 > "Dr. Philipp Tomsich" <philipp.toms...@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > >> >> > On 30 Apr 2018, at 10:34, Emmanuel Vadot <m...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Vadot <m...@freebsd.org> >> > --- >> > api/api.c | 11 +++++++++++ >> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/api/api.c b/api/api.c >> > index 7eee2fc083..7d1608b520 100644 >> > --- a/api/api.c >> > +++ b/api/api.c >> > @@ -290,6 +290,17 @@ static int API_dev_close(va_list ap) >> > if (!err) >> > di->state = DEV_STA_CLOSED; >> > >> > +#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_HAVE_DCACHE_MAINTENANCE) && \ >> > + !defined(CONFIG_SYS_DCACHE_OFF) >> > + if (dcache_status()) >> > + flush_dcache_all(); >> > +#endif >> > +#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_HAVE_ICACHE_MAINTENANCE) && \ >> > + !defined(CONFIG_SYS_ICACHE_OFF) >> > + if (icache_status()) >> > + invalidate_icache_all(); >> > +#endif >> >> Wouldn?t it be a cleaner option to make flush_dcache_all and invalidate_icache_all >> weak-functions and provide a default implementation that does nothing. Those >> architectures that then need to implement specific cache maintenance, could >> override these as required. > > Tom had some concern about using weak function for this, see > https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-February/280652.html > > But if everybody is happy with me adding some global weak function for > caches I'll do that. >
I'm not very happy about it. Weak functions are just so hard to figure out. Is it called or not? The lack of link-time error is painful when debugging. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
