Re: disable l2 cache on kirkwood devices (workaround #658904)
Ian Campbell wrote:
> My main concern with doing this on the kernel side is that it will
> eventually fall foul of the attempts to reduce everything to a single
> kernel image, since the code will necessarily be quite kirkwood specific
> and run very early on.
Is it possible to do something reasonable if the extra features
register is read first? (Please forgive my ignorance.)
> Martin's testing of di on ARM suggests this issue isn't all that
> widespread, which lead me to conclude that the risk of making a change
> like this (either in the kernel or the installer/flash-kernel) for
> Wheezy was not worth the chance of breaking some other kirkwood device.
I think that's ok --- the change would be valuable upstream anyway,
and it can filter into mainline and wheezy whenever it has had an
appropriate amount of testing.