> > So why not just set it twice - surely that is harmless ? Why add complex
> > code ?
>
> At the _least_ you have to serialize the thing, which is most of what the
> patch actually does.
I suppose you're talking about the Intel patch, not mine, which is
obviously out. I admit it was too complex.
The problem with the original code is that it combines reading the status
of the MTRR default register and disabling cache in a single step that
is performed simultaneously by all CPUs.
The patch from Intel inserts synchronization between these two steps,
thereby avoiding that the second CPU reads a "defaults status" that in
reality is the "cache disabled" status the first CPU had set before.
This suffices to fix the problem.
Martin
-- Martin Wilck Phone: +49 5251 8 15113 Fujitsu Siemens Computers Fax: +49 5251 8 20409 Heinz-Nixdorf-Ring 1 mailto:Martin.Wilck@Fujitsu-Siemens.com D-33106 Paderborn http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/primergy- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 31 2002 - 21:00:50 EST