Re: [discuss] [patch] mtrr: fix issues with large addresses

[Jan Beulich]

>> I don't think I remember a restriction here, at least not below 44 bits
>> (that's where pfn-s would need to become 64-bit wide).
>
>The i386 mm code only supports 4 entries in the PGD, so more than 36bit cannot 
>be mapped right now.

That has nothing to do with the number of physical address bits.

>Also even 64MB barely works (many boxes don't boot), you would likely
>need at least the 4:4 patch to go >64GB. Also we know there are tons
>of possible deadlocks in various subsystems when the lowmem:highmem ratio 
>gets so out of hand.
>
>Ok it could be probably all fixed with some work (at least the mm part,
>the deadlocks would be more tricky), but would seem fairly 
>pointless to me because all machines with >36bits support are 64bit capable.

That's a different story, and certainly a limiting factor. But this shouldn't
e.g. disallow (hypothetical?) systems that have a very sparse memory map
extending beyond 64G.

Jan
-
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/