Re: cacheble to uncachble change

From: Mario Smarduch <cms063_at_email.mot.com>
Date: 2004-04-28 08:35:10
David Mosberger wrote:

> >>>>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 16:31:57 -0500, Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com> said:
>
>   Jack> Maybe I was not clear. I *know* that memory attribute aliasing
>   Jack> is a bad thing to do. I was commenting on Robin's mail and
>   Jack> providing a real-life example on where/how it causes
>   Jack> problems. Prefetching is a perfectly valid thing for the cpu
>   Jack> to do. Any time there is a valid TLB entry, prefetching can &
>   Jack> will happen. DONT allow a TLB entry to cover both cached &
>   Jack> uncached pages.
>
> Sounds like we're in violent agreement! ;-)
>
>         --david

I guess the question wasn't so much about attribute aliasing but
killing all intransit memory accesses and prefetch before its
safe to change the TLB attribute to uncacheble, with assurance that
all new mem refs/prefetch will come from memory. I appreciate
all your inputs.

- Mario.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Tue Apr 27 18:43:25 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:25 EST