On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 2:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
quoted text
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
> >
> > >  Overall, I'm feeling there is something really completely wrong if this
> > > needs manual tunables of any sort.
> > >
> >
> > the problem is BIOS set MTRR like BIG WB - SOME SAMLL UC to spare mtrr
> regs.
> >
> > but later X server driver want to set some range to WC. that already
> > is fallen in UC...
> >
>
>  That's not the point.  I understand you want to flatten the layout.  The
> point is: why do you need manual tunables for the algorithm to do the right
> thing?

optimal result is not losing covering for ranges that is originally
covered, and still keep as many of spare mtrr entries for X server
driver.
we only have 8 mtrrs, could lose some covering because of run out of mtrr regs.
So we need to search it according to chunk/gran with ram ranges that
is defined by old mtrr layout.

and if we can not find the optimal setting, user could select one
setting (chunk/gran size) to boot next time, but he will lose some
covering.
for some regions. later trim_mtrr will remove those range from e820 map

YH
--
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/