James Bottomley wrote:
quoted text > On Sun, 2008-04-27 at 15:00 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> James Bottomley wrote:
>>> I might add that the intel SAPIC functions
>>> in roughly the same manner, so this might break more than just voyager.
>> Are you referring to the IA64 SAPIC here, or something else? The only
>> mention of SAPIC in the x86 tree appear to be naming of fields in ACPI
>> tables.
>
> Yes, that's the one ... but I believe a class of the xAPICs also used a
> similar principle.
I certainly have never seen a system on which the APIC has been mapped
cacheable. I would be very interested in the details, so if you could
elaborate that would be extremely useful.
-hpa
--
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
Re: Breakage caused by unreviewed patch in x86 tree , H. Peter Anvin , (Sun Apr 27, 6:13 pm)