From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c09::235; helo=mail-wm0-x235.google.com; envelope-from=leif.lindholm@linaro.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A99621F3C18D for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 08:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id u138so6277961wmu.5 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 08:30:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=oDaDM7iw+YJzql/AeH9gQ783U8gV22o8Idxc9yoWLd0=; b=OGjotcS+7lMvkuvUp3j61yIr/6Ty7qiA+pMoD9/7xlEj4La885ygzqrrTnhw7Me0QA CMD3qmM0B8Ho3DctCiTMrMjkDoL2Zg68c0NS4ZjRCv2QMvZbnORWPRKyPT5M+9XeWsKe CnN2zxCON2OAP9pbwO9bUKejTm1/++8ECIYYA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=oDaDM7iw+YJzql/AeH9gQ783U8gV22o8Idxc9yoWLd0=; b=p5T4uVMl0gnIJtcIbF7AMoDtxQiz51hBHCrXXDbJVssXRt+UOlfWUO13FWwG21XQ4B Q5qzm6xYTG69HnwwySRgEALp86jLLIxGeLHqj3ife0/qqR2V7zZvh6djNQyLML3qLQI1 L3/lbjlTq+EVKpRuHkzxhMTT+MTPcV7OWmiJUY8lrBLDD3dFXVT6MwFnG7fxOZhzzoKl 2DL0pO3YKSc3pi8zgMuF6x47d6XVDFhDJ3Qc7UHCdZZcUjfk79GVnWrHgb9Zi+kWRhJe Il94hOhdUrct+zUy0+IqffQanIXHV4/UBMQmsVJcoAGdVGbHk+v6wrjxHkf1qiTIoLUi NMig== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaW7GvUWnutNSmnC2VHUW5tKb7GMZtVyDBYRr5JHwCbJ6K2XnQV0 3ZOPVxWmdhmbgF+jPsclHPibUw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBg9KIvTzhS/A7dxeNrBJl3zKrqDWSlvoHbIJKusefc2DiLpUR0yxXkSXopoBzJC4tn57DD0w== X-Received: by 10.223.147.166 with SMTP id 35mr14892117wrp.90.1507649398922; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 08:29:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bivouac.eciton.net (bivouac.eciton.net. [2a00:1098:0:86:1000:23:0:2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x185sm6126848wmx.35.2017.10.10.08.29.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 10 Oct 2017 08:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:29:56 +0100 From: Leif Lindholm To: Marcin Wojtas Cc: edk2-devel-01 , Ard Biesheuvel , nadavh@marvell.com, Neta Zur Hershkovits , Kostya Porotchkin , Hua Jing , semihalf-dabros-jan Message-ID: <20171010152956.7guboigtuofxygsz@bivouac.eciton.net> References: <1507568462-28775-1-git-send-email-mw@semihalf.com> <1507568462-28775-5-git-send-email-mw@semihalf.com> <20171010144359.z57jipw6hdlkyjxj@bivouac.eciton.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [platforms: PATCH 04/13] Marvell/Armada: Armada70x0Lib: Clean FV in the D-cache before boot X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:26:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 04:50:04PM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote: > 2017-10-10 16:43 GMT+02:00 Leif Lindholm : > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 07:00:53PM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote: > >> From: Ard Biesheuvel > >> > >> To prevent cache coherency issues when chainloading via U-Boot, clean > >> and invalidate the FV image in the caches before re-enabling the MMU. > > > > Is this only relevant for chainloading (which is not the expected > > normal usage) or is it also important for warm-reset - for example for > > capsule update (at least from within OS)? > > Initially it was done for chainloading purpose - I don't use it > anymore, but just thought the patch itself is worth keeping. About > capsule update - I haven't tried it, it's been not the top priority > for me recently. > > > If the former, I would prefer for this to be conditionalised, and not > > included by default. > > How can we detect, that uefi is being chain-loaded? Oh, I meant compile time. Hence "not included by default". It has been a useful debug feature, but I don't think anyone is expecting to be routinely run either EDK2 on top of U-Boot or U-Boot on top of EDK2 on this platform. > > If the latter, please update the commit message. > > I'm considering keeping this patch aside, until it may become > necessary for capsule update, as I cannot guarantee now it's needed at > all. What's your recommendation? I'll wait to see what Ard has to say. So yes, it may make sense to move it out of the series for now. Regards, Leif