From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Jackson Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Don't do MTRR setup if PAT is enabled Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:39:45 -0400 Message-ID: <4F5F9471.10803@redhat.com> References: <1331655733-2211-1-git-send-email-ajax@redhat.com> <1331655733-2211-3-git-send-email-ajax@redhat.com> <4F5F8B9C.1020208@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00579E8A0 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:39:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4F5F8B9C.1020208@kernel.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, x86@kernel.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On 3/13/12 2:02 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > However, for the overall goal of the patch sequence, I think it is a > good thing to not use MTRRs when PAT is available. Part of me is > wondering if we shouldn't simply turn off the X86_FEATURE_PAT in > boot_cpu_info when PAT is disabled. It looks like the only user of cpu_has_pat is the PAT code itself, so that should be safe in the sense of not breaking anyone's expectations. And it would avoid needing to export another symbol. I like. Will respin to do that, with better descriptions. - ajax