lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] xen: core dom0 support
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> Unless we're planning on dropping support for processes with no or
> broken PAT support, we're always going to have to deal with the non-PAT
> case. Xen just falls into the "processor with no PAT" case. And
> if/when we work out how to paravirtualize PAT, it will no longer be in
> that case.
>

In this particular case, this is actually false. "No PAT" in the
processor is *not* the same thing as "no cacheability controls in the
page tables". Every processor since the 386 has had UC, WT, and WB
controls in the page tables; PAT only added the ability to do WC (and
WP, which we don't use). Since the number of processors which can do WC
at all but don't have PAT is a small set of increasingly obsolete
processors, we may very well choose to simply ignore the WC capabilities
of these particular processors.

-hpa



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-02 00:59    [W:0.168 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site