lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 5/5] kexec: X86: Pass memory ranges via e820 table instead of memmap= boot parameter
(2013/04/13 7:17), Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 04/12/2013 07:56 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 04/12/2013 07:31 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>>> I also have to admit that I don't see the difference between /dev/mem
>>>> and /dev/oldmem, as the former allows access to memory ranges outside
>>>> the ones used by the current kernel, which is what the oldmem device
>>>> seems to be intended to od.
>
> It varies from arch to arch of course.
>
> But, /dev/mem has restrictions on it, like CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM or the
> ARCH_HAS_VALID_PHYS_ADDR_RANGE. There's a lot of stuff that depends on
> it, *and* folks have tried to fix it up so that it's not _as_ blatant of
> a way to completely screw your system.
>
> /dev/mem also tries to be nice to arches that have restrictions like:
>
>> /*
>> * On ia64 if a page has been mapped somewhere as
>> * uncached, then it must also be accessed uncached
>> * by the kernel or data corruption may occur
>> */
>
> I think /dev/oldmem isn't so nice and could actually cause some real
> problems if used on ia64 where the cached/uncached accesses are mixed.

This sounds like there's no such issue on x86 cache mechanism. Is it
correct? If so, what is the difference between ia64 and x86 cache
mechanisms?

--
Thanks.
HATAYAMA, Daisuke



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-04-15 07:41    [W:0.104 / U:1.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site