[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A4E9E34.2030103@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:11:32 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: lkml@...ethan.org
CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Bug Fix]: Do 32-bit table calculations in pre-processor
Michael S. Zick wrote:
> On Fri July 3 2009, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Michael S. Zick wrote:
>>>> The CPUID flags, in particular the pse flag.
>>>>
>>> I haven't touch anything that would have changed that -
>>> so this should be representative (the *&^*% datasheet says yes to pse also)
>>>
>> Actually, come to think of it, we don't generate PSE page tables
>> initially -- we only later go in and reclaim the page tables if we
>> switch to PSE (and $DEITY knows if we're doing it correctly...)
>>
>
> I am of that age range where senility has to be considered, but not this time:
>
> "Via C7-M Datasheet", May 2008 (supposed to be most recent) -
>
> page 22 - section 2.3.7 - Table 2-14 "CR4 Bits"
> "<5> PAE: Enables address extensions; C7-M:<r>"
> <quote>An "r" means that this bit is reserved. It appears as a 0 when read,
> and a GP exception is signaled if an attemp is made to write a 1 to this bit.</quote>
>
> Same document -
> page 16 - section 2.3.2 - Table 2-3 "CPUID Feature Flag Values (EAX=1)"
> <EDX:6> PAE: Physical address extensions; C7:<1>
Especially since I was talking about PSE and not PAE.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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