Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-21 Thread Howard Chu
Siddha, Suresh B wrote: On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 09:33:30AM -0700, Howard Chu wrote: So now I have this, which is pretty much what I wanted: reg00: base=0x ( 0MB), size=2048MB: write-back, count=1 reg01: base=0x8000 (2048MB), size=1024MB: write-back, count=1 reg02: base=0x1

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-21 Thread Siddha, Suresh B
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 09:33:30AM -0700, Howard Chu wrote: > Hi, was wondering if anyone else has been tripped up by this... I've got > 4GB of > RAM in my Asus A8V Deluxe and memory hole mapping enabled in the BIOS. By > default, my system boots up with these MTRR settings: > > reg00: base=0x

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-20 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Thursday, September 20, 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:50:23 pm Andi Kleen wrote: > > Jesse Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > To do this in a nicer way (and be less vulnerable to similar BIOS > > > funkiness) the kernel really needs full PAT support. That

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-20 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:50:23 pm Andi Kleen wrote: > Jesse Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > To do this in a nicer way (and be less vulnerable to similar BIOS > > funkiness) the kernel really needs full PAT support. That should allow > > WC over WB and WC over UC mappings to occur

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-20 Thread Avi Kivity
Andi Kleen wrote: Is there any reason not to set the MTRRs to define the entire memory as write back, and use PAT exclusively for setting cacheability? That risks breaking SMM or BIOS code. Yes. Too bad. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function - To unsubscr

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-20 Thread Andi Kleen
> Is there any reason not to set the MTRRs to define the entire memory as > write back, and use PAT exclusively for setting cacheability? That risks breaking SMM or BIOS code. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTE

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-20 Thread Avi Kivity
Andi Kleen wrote: Jesse Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: To do this in a nicer way (and be less vulnerable to similar BIOS funkiness) the kernel really needs full PAT support. That should allow WC over WB and WC over UC mappings to occur, at least if I'm remembering the docs right...

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
Jesse Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > To do this in a nicer way (and be less vulnerable to similar BIOS > funkiness) the kernel really needs full PAT support. That should allow > WC over WB and WC over UC mappings to occur, at least if I'm > remembering the docs right... PAT only reall

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-19 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Friday, September 14, 2007 9:33 am Howard Chu wrote: > So the question is - was there an easier/correct way to do this? > > It might have been nice if the MTRR ioctls allowed the register > number to be specified on the Set commands, though I'm not sure that > would have helped in this case. To

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-18 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Eric W. Biederman wrote: >>> but Andi and Eric said resetting mtrr is not good... when someone from >>> intel try to trim the MTRR for intel CPU. >> >> There are a couple issues with changing the MTRR configuration. >> - You may not have perfect information

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-18 Thread Howard Chu
Eric W. Biederman wrote: but Andi and Eric said resetting mtrr is not good... when someone from intel try to trim the MTRR for intel CPU. There are a couple issues with changing the MTRR configuration. - You may not have perfect information on the cpu, the AMD revF is a good example. - Code i

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-16 Thread Eric W. Biederman
"Yinghai Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 9/16/07, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yinghai Lu wrote: >> > On 9/14/07, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi, was wondering if anyone else has been tripped up by this... I've got > 4GB of >> >> RAM in my Asus A8V Deluxe and memor

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-16 Thread Yinghai Lu
On 9/16/07, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yinghai Lu wrote: > > On 9/14/07, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, was wondering if anyone else has been tripped up by this... I've got > >> 4GB of > >> RAM in my Asus A8V Deluxe and memory hole mapping enabled in the BIOS. By > >>

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-16 Thread Howard Chu
Yinghai Lu wrote: On 9/14/07, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, was wondering if anyone else has been tripped up by this... I've got 4GB of RAM in my Asus A8V Deluxe and memory hole mapping enabled in the BIOS. By default, my system boots up with these MTRR settings: reg00: base=0x0

Re: MTRR initialization

2007-09-14 Thread Yinghai Lu
On 9/14/07, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, was wondering if anyone else has been tripped up by this... I've got 4GB > of > RAM in my Asus A8V Deluxe and memory hole mapping enabled in the BIOS. By > default, my system boots up with these MTRR settings: > > reg00: base=0x ( 0

MTRR initialization

2007-09-14 Thread Howard Chu
Hi, was wondering if anyone else has been tripped up by this... I've got 4GB of RAM in my Asus A8V Deluxe and memory hole mapping enabled in the BIOS. By default, my system boots up with these MTRR settings: reg00: base=0x ( 0MB), size=4096MB: write-back, count=1 reg01: base=0x100

Re: [PATCH for 2.6.22] [1/10] i386: bug in i386 MTRR initialization

2007-06-20 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > > From: Andrea Righi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > BUG: at include/linux/slub_def.h:77 kmalloc_index() This was never a bug, and should have been named a warning. It's also gone in the current source-tree, since we instead of warning now just return ZERO_SIZ

[PATCH for 2.6.22] [1/10] i386: bug in i386 MTRR initialization

2007-06-20 Thread Andi Kleen
From: Andrea Righi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BUG: at include/linux/slub_def.h:77 kmalloc_index() [] get_slab+0x1d0/0x260 [] __kmalloc+0x16/0x70 [] sysenter_setup+0x6f/0x330 [] mtrr_bp_init+0xcd/0x270 [] unknown_bootoption+0x0/0x250 [] unknown_bootoption+0x0/0x250 [] check_bugs+0x8/0x160 [] proc_

2.6.22-rc2: bug in i386 MTRR initialization

2007-05-19 Thread Andrea Righi
BUG: at include/linux/slub_def.h:77 kmalloc_index() [] get_slab+0x1d0/0x260 [] __kmalloc+0x16/0x70 [] sysenter_setup+0x6f/0x330 [] mtrr_bp_init+0xcd/0x270 [] unknown_bootoption+0x0/0x250 [] unknown_bootoption+0x0/0x250 [] check_bugs+0x8/0x160 [] proc_sys_init+0xc/0x30 [] start_kernel+0x21f