> -----Original Message----- > From: Catalin Marinas [mailto:catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 3:57 PM > To: Shilimkar, Santosh > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ARM: l2x0: Optmise the range based operations > > On Sat, 2010-07-31 at 23:16 +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > > For the big buffers which are in excess of cache size, the maintaince > > operations by PA are very slow. For such buffers the maintainace > > operations can be speeded up by using the WAY based method. > > > > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> > > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > ------- > > 1 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c b/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c > > index b2938d4..c0d6108 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c > > @@ -116,6 +116,18 @@ static void l2x0_flush_all(void) > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&l2x0_lock, flags); > > } > > > > +static void l2x0_clean_all(void) > > +{ > > + unsigned long flags; > > + > > + /* clean all ways */ > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&l2x0_lock, flags); > > + writel_relaxed(l2x0_way_mask, l2x0_base + L2X0_CLEAN_WAY); > > + cache_wait(l2x0_base + L2X0_CLEAN_WAY, l2x0_way_mask); > > In case you'll base this on top of my PL310 optimisation, you should use > cache_wait_way() as the cache_wait() becomes a no-op. > Yep. Will fix that while rebasing. Will post the full series with Thomas's two patches included on top of your "[PATCH 0/9] Various patches for 2.6.37-rc1" which is already in the linux-next Regards, Santosh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
