![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread
|
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andi Kleen [mailto:andi@firstfloor.org]
>Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 11:13 AM
>To: Pallipadi, Venkatesh
>Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com; rdreier@cisco.com;
>torvalds@linux-foundation.org; gregkh@suse.de;
>airlied@skynet.ie; davej@redhat.com; mingo@elte.hu;
>tglx@linutronix.de; hpa@zytor.co;
>linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Siddha, Suresh B
>Subject: Re: [patch 07/11] PAT x86: pat-conflict resolution
>using linear list
>
>venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com writes:
>>
>> /* Reset the direct mapping. Can block */
>> - if (p->flags >> 20)
>> - ioremap_change_attr(p->phys_addr, p->size, 0);
>> + if (p->flags >> 20) {
>> + free_mattr(p->phys_addr, p->phys_addr +
>get_vm_area_size(p),
>> + p->flags>>20);
>> + ioremap_change_attr(p->phys_addr,
>get_vm_area_size(p), 0);
>
>If you really unmap all holes and forbid (or let it just return the
>__va address) ioremap on anything mapped (which is probably ok) then
>you can eliminate that completely.
>
We heard X can allocate a page and then map it UC using it through gart.
So, I don't we can forbid all ioremaps for RAM.
Thanks,
Venki
| ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-01-10 20:37 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||