From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailserv2.iuinc.com (IDENT:qmailr@mailserv2.iuinc.com [206.245.164.55]) by puffin.external.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA09438 for ; Sun, 5 Mar 2000 12:34:49 -0700 Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 19:34:43 +0100 From: Philipp Rumpf To: Grant Grundler Cc: willy@thepuffingroup.com, huck@cup.hp.com, parisc-linux@thepuffingroup.com Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] lasi scsi driver Message-ID: <20000305193443.A8727@abacus.local> References: <20000304144938.A9944@thepuffingroup.com> <200003050549.VAA03562@milano.cup.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200003050549.VAA03562@milano.cup.hp.com>; from grundler@cup.hp.com on Sat, Mar 04, 2000 at 09:49:49PM -0800 List-ID: > In personal conversations, two knowledgable folks have suggested > the following: > o PA-7100LC systems support uncacheable memory and subcacheline access. > So these boxes should be supportable. > > o PA-7300LC systems *might* support uncacheable memory and subcacheline... > (Could anyone definitively answer this for any PA-7300LC box?) It does, according to our documentation. > o PA-7000 systems are pretty much SOL. > (But they could be perfectly useful if folks add cache flushing to > the few device drivers needed for graphics and stuff off of LASI.) More importantly, they don't use PCI (and not even GSC). It's perfectly fine for us to require HP-PB drivers aso to do cache flushing. > In summary, the number of "unsupportable" systems isn't as big > as I first thought. I'm still not convinced there's going to be any problem at all, even on runway systems. Philipp Rumpf