Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:32:53 -0800 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: Folding _PAGE_PWT into _PAGE_PCD (was Re: unify pagetable accessors patch causes double fault II) |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote: >> BTW, I just noticed that _PAGE_PWT has been folded into _PAGE_PCD. This >> seems like a really bad idea to me, since it breaks the rule that >> _PAGE_X == 1 << _PAGE_BIT_X. I can't think of a specific place where >> this would cause problems, but this kind of non-uniformity always ends >> up biting someone in the arse. >> > > Agreed that it's a bad idea. > > >> I think having a specific _PAGE_NOCACHE which combines these bits is a >> better approach. >> > > CPA series adds that already > > +/* Needs special handling for large pages */ > +#define _PAGE_CACHE (_PAGE_PCD|_PAGE_PWT|_PAGE_PAT) >
Good, but isn't the name _PAGE_CACHE misleading? Or does it mean something else in the context of PAT?
J
| |