Re: [RFC] Cachemap for 2.6.12rc4-mm1. Was Re: [PATCH] enhance x86 MTRR handling

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 04:36:10PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

 > The Efficeon (TM8xxx) series does have PAT.

1:1 with the Intel implementation I assume based on your earlier comments?

 > > > >+ * Note: On Athlon cpus PAT2/PAT3 & PAT6/PAT7 are both Uncacheable 
 > > since > >+ *	 there is no uncached type.
 > > > If one sets the PAT to "uncached", does one get the same function as 
 > > > "uncachable"?
 > >
 > >AIUI, only as long as we don't have an MTRR covering the same range marked 
 > >WC.
 > >It seems to be the only thing I could find documenting the differences
 > >between 'uncached' and 'uncacheable' in this context.
 > >Though I've only looked through the Intel & AMD K8 docs, I don't have
 > >the K7 ones to hand.
 > >
 > 
 > I mean, on the Athlon series, is it really necessary to use a different 
 > value?

I'd have to dig out the docs and check.

		Dave
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/