Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s

[Eric W. Biederman]

Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> writes:

> On Sunday 13 November 2005 18:26, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>> I'd hope the vendors are not doing that by default because we have
>> kernel code that uses lock against not other processors but other bus
>> masters. The ECC code is one example. 
>
> It's a bad hack anyways. Better would be probably to use a uncached WC write.
> I would rather use that.

For read modify write?

The point is to make the cache line dirty so that the
memory controller will write the data back.

The interesting sequence is:
lock; addl $0, %(reg)

I'm not actually sure the lock is even necessary.  Mostly this is
for brain-dead chipsets, chipsets you can't trust, or at least
chipsets that won't do a background scrub for you.

I don't think it is possible to do an uncached read modify write?

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/