[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709181533370.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:36:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...il.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clarify pci_iomap() usage for MMIO-only devices
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> Also, I've been told that modern x86 chipsets have the ability to remap
> IO space in the CPU physical address space. Is that true ? That would
> allow even x86 to get rid of the condition and just use some magic
> offset at map time.
I've not seen that, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if IO
virtualization eventually causes something like this to happen:
virtualizing PIO is just damn painful right now, due to the lack of any
way to remap it.
I *think* you may be confused with the PCI config cycles, where the new
MMIO configuration was introduced (for similar virtualization reasons).
But it's also possible that this is one of those undocumented areas and
CPU's actually do have some IO remapping facility.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists