Messages in this thread | | | From | "Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH v4 4/7] x86, mm, pat: Add pgprot_writethrough() for WT | Date | Tue, 4 Nov 2014 03:34:35 +0000 |
| |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Lutomirski [mailto:luto@amacapital.net] > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 5:01 PM > To: Thomas Gleixner > Cc: Kani, Toshimitsu; Elliott, Robert (Server Storage); hpa@zytor.com; > mingo@redhat.com; akpm@linux-foundation.org; arnd@arndb.de; linux- > mm@kvack.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; jgross@suse.com; > stefan.bader@canonical.com; hmh@hmh.eng.br; yigal@plexistor.com; > konrad.wilk@oracle.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/7] x86, mm, pat: Add pgprot_writethrough() for > WT > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > wrote: ... > On the other hand, I thought that _GPL was supposed to be more about > whether the thing using it is inherently a derived work of the Linux > kernel. Since WT is an Intel concept, not a Linux concept, then I > think that this is a hard argument to make.
IBM System/360 Model 85 (1968) had write-through (i.e., store-through) caching. Intel might claim Write Combining, though.
| |