From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: steve.capper@linaro.org (Steve Capper)
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 17:04:41 +0100
Subject: [PATCHv2 1/4] arm64: Add CONFIG_DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX support
In-Reply-To: <20140603153727.GR23149@arm.com>
References: <1401742658-11841-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org>
 <1401742658-11841-2-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org>
 <20140603152201.GP23149@arm.com>
 <CAPvkgC3rMhN0cvZsjX028XDk8esnyvi0GTSvcXFmn9ub_vcZuQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140603153727.GR23149@arm.com>
Message-ID: <CAPvkgC071vE=Nq=d4gTArda_y7QdStdvD+BB8L6qW=PWvZZtvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 3 June 2014 16:37, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 04:31:57PM +0100, Steve Capper wrote:
>> On 3 June 2014 16:22, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> >
>> > We already have an isb in flush_tlb_kernel_range.
>>
>> Hi Will,
>> The following thread discusses the removal of the isb() from
>> flush_tlb_kernel_range:
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-May/252829.html
>>
>> Also, I asked for it to be added to this series in this email thread
>> but you thought it was benign:
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-May/252869.html
>> So we could probably do without the isb(.).
>
> Bah, I'd completely forgotten all of that! Anyway, I'd say it's up to
> the patch removing the existing isb from flush_tlb_kernel_range to fix
> the callers, not for other people to anticipate that change.

Agreed.... but Catalin has applied my patch before this version hit the list:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-May/254828.html

>
> Even with that change, the isb isn't needed, as mentioned in the second
> link above.

Agreed :-).