On 19.06.24 14:22, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
Hi Heinrich,
On Sun, 16 Jun 2024 at 20:31, Heinrich Schuchardt
<heinrich.schucha...@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.schucha...@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.
Best regards
Heinrich
Thanks
/Ilias
+}
+#else
+void invalidate_icache_all(void) {}
+#endif
--
2.43.0
