Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 13 Jun 2015 08:37:32 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] RIP MTRR - status update for upcoming v4.2 |
| |
* Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> On Jun 12, 2015 12:59 AM, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: > > > > >>> On 12.06.15 at 01:23, <toshi.kani@hp.com> wrote: > > > There are two usages on MTRRs: > > > 1) MTRR entries set by firmware > > > 2) MTRR entries set by OS drivers > > > > > > We can obsolete 2), but we have no control over 1). As UEFI firmwares > > > also set this up, this usage will continue to stay. So, we should not > > > get rid of the MTRR code that looks up the MTRR entries, while we have > > > no need to modify them. > > > > > > Such MTRR entries provide safe guard to /dev/mem, which allows privileged > > > user to access a range that may require UC mapping while the /dev/mem driver > > > blindly maps it with WB. MTRRs converts WB to UC in such a case. > > > > But it wouldn't be impossible to simply read the MTRRs upon boot, store the > > information, disable MTRRs, and correctly use PAT to achieve the same effect > > (i.e. the "blindly maps" part of course would need fixing). > > This may crash and burn badly when we call a UEFI function or an SMI happens. I > think we should just leave the MTRRs alone.
Not to mention suspend/resume, reboot and other goodies where the firmware might pop up expecting intact MTRRs.
Btw., doesn't a lack of MTRRs imply UC? So is 'crash and burn' possible in most cases? Isn't it just 'executes slower than before'?
Thanks,
Ingo
| |