[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: fix affected memory range by dcache clean functions
 
 
Hi Stefano,
On 03/03/2017 01:15 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
 
clean_dcache_va_range and clean_and_invalidate_dcache_va_range don't
calculate the range correctly when "end" is not cacheline aligned. As a
result, the last cacheline is not skipped. Fix the issue by aligning the
start address to the cacheline size.
In addition, make the code simpler and faster in
invalidate_dcache_va_range, by removing the module operation and using
bitmasks instead.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: edgar.iglesias@xxxxxxxxxx
CC: edgar.iglesias@xxxxxxxxxx
---
 xen/include/asm-arm/page.h | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/page.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/page.h
index 86de0b6..4b46e88 100644
--- a/xen/include/asm-arm/page.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/page.h
@@ -291,24 +291,20 @@ extern size_t cacheline_bytes;
 static inline int invalidate_dcache_va_range(const void *p, unsigned long size)
 {
-    size_t off;
     const void *end = p + size;
+    size_t cacheline_mask = cacheline_bytes - 1;
     dsb(sy);           /* So the CPU issues all writes to the range */
-    off = (unsigned long)p % cacheline_bytes;
-    if ( off )
+    if ( (uintptr_t)p & cacheline_mask )
     {
-        p -= off;
+        p = (void *)((uintptr_t)p & ~cacheline_mask);
         asm volatile (__clean_and_invalidate_dcache_one(0) : : "r" (p));
         p += cacheline_bytes;
-        size -= cacheline_bytes - off;
 
 It would have been nice to explain in the commit message that you 
removed the adjustment of the size because the variable is not used 
later on.
With that:
Reviewed-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
 
 
    
     |