Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] arm: add new asm macro update_sctlr

[Rob Herring]

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 03:55:42PM +0000, Leif Lindholm wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 10:34:15AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 01:12:47PM +0000, Leif Lindholm wrote:
>> > > Oh, that's neat - thanks!
>> > >
>> > > Well, given that, I can think of two less horrible options:
>> > > 1)
>> > >   .macro  update_sctlr, tmp:req, set=, clear=
>> > >         mrc       p15, 0, \tmp, c1, c0, 0
>> > >   .ifnc   \set,
>> > >         orr       \tmp, \set
>> > >   .endif
>> > >   .ifnc   \clear,
>> > >   mvn     \clear, \clear
>> > >   and     \tmp, \tmp, \clear
>> >
>> > Can't you use bic here?
>>
>> Yeah.
>>
>> > >   .endif
>> > >         mcr       p15, 0, \tmp, c1, c0, 0
>> > >   .endm
>> > >
>> > > With the two call sites in uefi_phys.S as:
>> > >
>> > >   ldr     r5, =(CR_M)
>> > >   update_sctlr    r12, , r5
>> > > and
>> > >   ldr     r4, =(CR_I | CR_C | CR_M)
>> > >   update_sctlr    r12, r4
>> >
>> > These ldr= could be movs, right?
>>
>> The first one could.
>> The second one could be movw on armv7+.
>>
>> > If so, I definitely prefer this to putting an ldr = into the macro itself
>> > (option 2).
>>
>> And your preference between 1) and 2) is?
>
> (1), using bic and mov[tw] where possible.

Using mov[tw] will break on V6 enabled builds.

Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/