[+James and Catalin] On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 09:54:41AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > The second argument is the end "pointer", not the length. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c > index 8e9c924423b4e..a0b144cfaea71 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c > @@ -177,6 +177,7 @@ void machine_kexec(struct kimage *kimage) > * the offline CPUs. Therefore, we must use the __* variant here. > */ > __flush_icache_range((uintptr_t)reboot_code_buffer, > + (uintptr_t)reboot_code_buffer + > arm64_relocate_new_kernel_size); Urgh, well spotted. It's annoyingly different from __flush_dcache_area(). But now I'm wondering what this code actually does... the loop condition in invalidate_icache_by_line works with 64-bit arithmetic, so we could spend a /very/ long time here afaict. It's also a bit annoying that we do a bunch of redundant D-cache maintenance too. Should we use invalidate_icache_range() here instead? (and why does that thing need to toggle uaccess)? Argh, too many questions! Will
