* Is it too strict for VIPT cache flushing in flush_cache_[mm|range]?
[not found] <CAH3Oq6SRSeXfrW56j=brCOE5PJgfw31rOSCfm-CgJwGaiJYRsw@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2012-10-23 2:55 ` Ning Jiang
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Ning Jiang @ 2012-10-23 2:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
2012/10/16 Ning Jiang <ning.n.jiang@gmail.com>:
> I found that the implementation of flush_cache_mm() and
> flush_cache_range() for VIPT aliasing case is to clean + invalidate
> whole data cache, but for a physically tagged cache, why do we need to
> perform such an operation? Is it because we'll have aliasing issue?
>
> I searched through the git history and found it is brought in the
> commit "d7b6b358" "[ARM] Fix ARMv6 VIPT cache >= 32K", before that,
> there is indeed no flushing, why we "Fix ARMv6 VIPT cache >= 32K"?
>
> Sorry for asking such stupid question, but it really confuses me ;-)
>
> Thanks,
> Ning
Maybe someone in the mail list can give an answer ;-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2012-10-23 2:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <CAH3Oq6SRSeXfrW56j=brCOE5PJgfw31rOSCfm-CgJwGaiJYRsw@mail.gmail.com>
2012-10-23 2:55 ` Is it too strict for VIPT cache flushing in flush_cache_[mm|range]? Ning Jiang
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.