From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:17:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:17:31 -0500 Received: from h-64-105-136-52.SNVACAID.covad.net ([64.105.136.52]:44458 "EHLO freya.yggdrasil.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:17:30 -0500 From: "Adam J. Richter" Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 16:23:59 -0800 Message-Id: <200211100023.QAA27139@baldur.yggdrasil.com> To: James.Bottomley@steeleye.com Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Untested port of parisc_device to generic device interface Cc: andmike@us.ibm.com, greg@kroah.com, hch@lst.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mochel@osdl.org, parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org, willy@debian.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org James Bottomley wrote: >3. Machine is partially consistent. consistent allocation may fail because >we're out of consistent memory so we have to fall back to the old. I'd like to know more about what these machines look like in the real world. Specifically, I am interested in the trade-off of having a parameter to wback_fake_consistent so that it could be enabled or disabled on an individual basis. I suspect that the parameter is not worth the clutter because these "partially consistent" machines either have a large amount of consistent memory, so the case of the allocation failing in the is not worth supporting, or it is easy to check for consistent memory on them with something like "if ((unsigned long) vaddr < 0xwhatever)", but I'm just guessing. Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road adam@yggdrasil.com \ / Miplitas, California 95035 +1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America "Free Software For The Rest Of Us."