lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
Date
From
SubjectRe: PAT support
On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 05:54:57PM -0500, Terence Ripperda wrote:
> > I think I prefer the do/undo model instead of push/pop.
> > That can work with cmaps too. PAGE_KERNEL means no cmap,
> > PAGE_KERNEL_WC and PAGE_KERNEL_NOCACHE get a cmap.
>
> but then what is the point of cmap? I would expect a mix of WC and UC mappings to be much less dangerous than a mix of WC/UC and WB. perhaps my mindset is wrong, but it seems allowing ioremap to request a cached mapping is important, and that if that mapping was followed by ioremap_nocached or ioremap_wrcomb, that these subsequent calls should fail.

Hmm, you're right. push/pop is probably better for io-mappings, otherwise
we cannot catch existing mappings. This will be needed for user mmap
too.

Ignore my previous suggestion on that then please. Sorry for the noise.


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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.048 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site