Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 02:53:57PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
The spec says that devices can put additional restriction on supported
cacheline size (IIRC, the example was something like power of two >= or
<= certain size) and should ignore (treat as zero) if unsupported value
is written. So, there might be need for more low level driver
involvement which knows device restrictions, but I don't know whether
such devices exist.
That's nothing we can do anything about. The system cacheline size is
what it is. If the device doesn't support it, we can't fall back to a
different size, it'll cause data corruption. So we'll just continue on,
and devices which live up to the spec will act as if we hadn't
programmed a cache size. For devices that don't, we'll have the quirk.
For MWI, it will cause data corruption. For READ LINE and MULTIPLE, I
think it would be okay. The memory is prefetchable after all. Anyways,
this shouldn't be of too much problem and probably can be handled by
quirks if ever needed.
Arguably devices which don't support the real system cacheline size
would only get data corruption if they used MWI, so we only have to
prevent them from using MWI; they could use a different cacheline size
for MRM and MRL without causing data corruption. But I don't think we
want to go down that route; do you?
Oh yeah, that's what I was trying to say, and I don't want to go down
that route. So, I guess this one is settled.
Thanks.
--
tejun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
