[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1438614488.3214.466.camel@hp.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 09:08:08 -0600
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org, bp@...e.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, pat: Add comments to cachemode translation tables
On Sun, 2015-08-02 at 12:07 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jul 2015, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-07-23 at 09:36 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > On 23.07.15 at 17:25, <toshi.kani@...com> wrote:
> > > > Yes, I agree with you. But such risk is very low -- 1) the regular
> > > > case
> > > > (no fallback) is used most of the cases, 2) the code using WT knows
> > > > what
> > > > type of memory it is dealing with. For example, pmem may map NVDIMM
> > > >
> > > > with
> > > > WT, and any sane BIOS sets MTRR to WB for NVDIMM.
> > >
> > > Do the words "sane" and "BIOS" really fit together in your opinion?
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > Anyway, I am not disagreeing with you... When UC is ready for both
> > regular
> > memory and IO memory, it should be changed to fall back to UC.
>
> What's the resolution of this discussion? Is that patch correct as is
> or do we get an updated version?
Yes, this patch is correct and we are in agreement.
What Jan mentioned about falling back to UC, instead of UC-, is a separate
item, and the code does not support it yet.
Thanks,
-Toshi
--
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