From: Petr Vandrovec <VANDROVE@vc...> - 2001-04-17 08:03:35
On 15 Apr 01 at 10:01, James Simmons wrote:
> How do you feel if we place handle for mtrr in fb_info? This way mtrr
> handling could be moved into fbmem instead of each driver handling.
Why? Only driver can enable MTRR, as only driver knows region size
(there is one pending bug in matroxfb that it passes to MTRR
only detected memory region instead of full region available for
framebuffer; It causes troubles in 12MB configuration (which is
unsupported by matrox, but... it works). And driver can easily put
MTRR handle(s) into its specific area.
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@ma...> - 2001-04-17 16:36:25
James Simmons wrote:
> >Preferably through an arch specific hook, so we can enable things like
> >write combining on non-Intel boxes as well.
> Okay. Have any ideas?
Take a look at the mtrr implementation -- it already handles different
types of Intel CPUs which handle MTRRs totally differently from each
How about extending mtrr to work on other arches? It already provides
the interface necessary...
Jeff Garzik | "Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a
Building 1024 | man to fish, and a US Navy submarine will make sure
MandrakeSoft | he's never hungry again." -- Chris Neufeld