From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from oss.sgi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g72AEjRw030321 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 03:14:45 -0700 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.3/Submit) id g72AEjYC030320 for linux-mips-outgoing; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 03:14:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: oss.sgi.com: majordomo set sender to owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com using -f Received: from dea.linux-mips.net (shaft17-f126.dialo.tiscali.de [62.246.17.126]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id g72AEcRw030310 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 03:14:40 -0700 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by dea.linux-mips.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g72AG0H03001; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 12:16:00 +0200 Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 12:16:00 +0200 From: Ralf Baechle To: Thiemo Seufer Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , linux-mips@fnet.fr, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [update] [patch] linux: Cache coherency fixes Message-ID: <20020802121600.A27824@dea.linux-mips.net> References: <20020801152500.A31808@dea.linux-mips.net> <20020801184929.B22824@dea.linux-mips.net> <20020801170649.GB15334@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20020801170649.GB15334@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>; from ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de on Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 07:06:49PM +0200 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO version=2.20 X-Spam-Level: Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 07:06:49PM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > [snip] > > Back in time I prefered CONFIG_NONCOHERENT_IO over CONFIG_COHERENT_IO > > because the noncoherent case needs additional code and in general I'm > > trying to reduce the number of the #if !defined conditionals for easier > > readability. > > > > The R10000 is our standard example why looking at the processor type doesn't > > work. It's used in coherent mode in IP27 but in coherent mode but in > > coherent mode in IP28 or IP32. Otoh I don't know of any system that > > JFTR: non-coherent mode in IP28 or IP32. Yep, you're right. I hope everybody concluded that from my non-coherent sentence ;-)