Messages in this thread | | | From | Mike Frysinger <> | Date | Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:36:03 -0400 | Subject | Re: virtual vs physical addresses to cache functions |
| |
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:26, John Linn wrote: > Maybe this is a dumb question...
you should see the stuff people put into hardware ...
> I believe that the kernel expects virtual addresses to be passed to the > defined cache functions across all architectures.
i believe they're virtual since most (sane) hardware virtual memory implementations are done with caches based on virtual addresses, but what do i know (leading into next point ...)
> Looking at PowerPC and Blackfin confirm this I think.
the Blackfin arch (which is what i work on) is a bad example as it lacks virtual memory support -mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |