[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7E82351C108FA840AB1866AC776AEC464FD82A88@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:33:31 -0700
From: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
To: Frank Mehnert <Frank.Mehnert@....COM>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Subject: RE: remap_pfn_range() not suitable for physical RAM?
Frank,
Patch here should eliminate the restriction.
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123664923030126&w=1
Thanks,
Venki
>-----Original Message-----
>From: linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org
>[mailto:linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Frank Mehnert
>Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 1:04 AM
>To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>Cc: peterz@...radead.org; Siddha, Suresh B
>Subject: Re: remap_pfn_range() not suitable for physical RAM?
>
>Hi,
>
>sorry for re-posting this message and sorry for addressing you
>directly.
>Perhaps you can help me again or can you give me a pointer for a proper
>documentation of the various *remap* and *vm_insert* functions:
>
>On Wednesday 04 March 2009, Frank Mehnert wrote:
>> since 2.6.29-rcX it seems to be not allowed anymore to use
>> remap_pfn_range() to remap physical RAM to userland. This restriction
>> applies only if CONFIG_X86_PAT is enabled. It seems that
>vm_insert_page()
>> does not have this restriction. Am I correct? And what is the reason
>> for this restriction?
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Frank
>--
>Dr.-Ing. Frank Mehnert Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/
>--
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