From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:43:13 +0000 Subject: Re: [Question] How to represent SYSTEM_RAM in kerenel/resouce.c Message-Id: <20071003164313.GH12049@parisc-linux.org> List-Id: References: <20071003103136.addbe839.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <1191429433.4939.49.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1191429433.4939.49.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Dave Hansen Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , LKML , andi@firstfloor.org, "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , Andrew Morton , pbadari@us.ibm.com, "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 09:37:13AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > I think we should take system ram out of the iomem file, at least. Rubbish. iomem is a representation of the physical addresses in the system as seen from the CPU's perspective. As I said in my previous mail in this thread, if you attempt to map a device's BAR over the top of physical RAM, things will go poorly for you. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."