Re: ioremap_nocache problem?

• Next message: Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer: "Re: [OT?] Coding Style"
• Previous message: J Sloan: "Re: Total loss with 2.4.0 (release) (win98 not honoring partitioning)"
• In reply to: Roman Zippel: "Re: ioremap_nocache problem?"
• Next in thread: David Wragg: "Re: ioremap_nocache problem?"
• Reply: David Wragg: "Re: ioremap_nocache problem?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

** Reply to message from Roman Zippel <zippel@fh-brandenburg.de> on Tue, 23 Jan
2001 19:12:36 +0100 (MET)

> ioremap creates a new mapping that shouldn't interfere with MTRR, whereas
> you can map a MTRR mapped area into userspace. But I'm not sure if it's
> correct that no flag is set for boot_cpu_data.x86 <= 3...

I was under the impression that the "don't cache" bit that ioremap_nocache sets
overrides any MTRR.

-- 
Timur Tabi - ttabi@interactivesi.com
Interactive Silicon - http://www.interactivesi.com
When replying to a mailing-list message, please direct the reply to the mailing list only.  Don't send another copy to me.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer: "Re: [OT?] Coding Style"
• Previous message: J Sloan: "Re: Total loss with 2.4.0 (release) (win98 not honoring partitioning)"
• In reply to: Roman Zippel: "Re: ioremap_nocache problem?"
• Next in thread: David Wragg: "Re: ioremap_nocache problem?"
• Reply: David Wragg: "Re: ioremap_nocache problem?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 23 2001 - 21:00:28 EST