[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <924EFEDD5F540B4284297C4DC59F3DEE010471B6@orsmsx423.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 15:20:08 -0700
From: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
To: "Dave Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>,
"Frans Pop" <elendil@...net.nl>,
"Barnes, Jesse" <jesse.barnes@...el.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Packard, Keith" <keith.packard@...el.com>,
"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Nick Piggin" <npiggin@...e.de>,
"Jesse Barnes" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
Subject: RE: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dave Airlie [mailto:airlied@...il.com]
>Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 3:11 PM
>To: Pallipadi, Venkatesh
>Cc: Ingo Molnar; Hugh Dickins; Frans Pop; Barnes, Jesse;
>linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Packard, Keith; Yinghai Lu;
>Andrew Morton; Linus Torvalds; H. Peter Anvin; Thomas
>Gleixner; Nick Piggin; Jesse Barnes
>Subject: Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect
>
>On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 6:05 AM, Venki Pallipadi
><venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 12:08:18PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> >
>> > * Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > I've tried doing it slightly differently below, don't
>know whether
>> > > > you'll consider it an improvement or not.
>> > >
>> > > Hugh: Thanks for looking into this. Yes. I like your
>modified patch.
>> > > Simpler and smaller.
>> >
>> > i have stuck your original patch into testing and nothing
>blew up so
>> > far. Due to the mm/ bits this is not for the scope of x86.git, but
>> > obviously it all looks good and is .26-worthy to me:
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
>> > Tested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
>> >
>> > Venki, could you please send a full patch against -git that has
>> > everything from Hugh included, with an updated changelog, for
>> > Linus/Andrew to ack/apply?
>> >
>>
>> Ingo,
>>
>> Split up the patch into two parts as the pci part was
>unrelated to mprotect
>> problem in a sense.
>>
>> Here is the first patch.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Venki
>>
>>
>> Some versions of X used the mprotect workaround to change
>caching type from
>>
>> UC to WB, so that it can then use mtrr to program WC for
>that region [1].
>> Change the mmap of pci space through /sys or /proc
>interfaces from UC to
>> UC_MINUS. With this change, X will not need to use mprotect
>> workaround to get WC type.
>> Also the bug with mprotect which lets caller to change PAT
>bits is fixed in
>> the follow on patch. So, this X workaround will stop
>working as well.
>>
>
>Wow this kinda puts X in a nasty position, we have 2.6.25 and
>previous kernels
>where we use the original /sys interfaces and nasty hack to
>workaround, but on 2.6.26 we magically need to
>switch to the /sys _uc interfaces or the users X will slow down.
>
No. With 2.6.26 you can still use same /sys resource file, without
the mprotect workaround and set the MTRR as before.
The change from UC to UC_MINUS in this patch ensures that the
X drivers MTRR will take precedence and X does not need any mprotect
hacks.
Thanks,
Venki
--
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