[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4766D443.6040805@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:55:47 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: "David P. Reed" <dpreed@...d.com>
CC: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Paul Rolland <rol@...917.net>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
rol@...be.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override.
David P. Reed wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Rene Herman wrote:
>>>
>>> I do not know how universal that is, but _reading_ port 0xf0 might in
>>> fact be sensible then? And should even work on a 386/387 pair? (I
>>> have a 386/387 in fact, although I'd need to dig it up).
>>>
>>
>> No. Someone might have used 0xf0 as a readonly port for other uses.
>>
> As support: port 80 on the reporter's (my) HP dv9000z laptop clearly
> responds to reads differently than "unused" ports. In particular, an
> inb takes 1/2 the elapsed time compared to a read to "known" unused port
> 0xed - 792 tsc ticks for port 80 compared to about 1450 tsc ticks for
> port 0xed and other unused ports (tsc at 800 MHz).
>
Any timings for port 0xf0 (write zero), out of curiosity?
-hpa
--
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