On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 14:02 +0200, Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 12:13 +0200, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > > > > If there was an erratum causing PAT not to be enabled on your processor, > > then definitely that > > may have cause strange inconsistencies. > > > > Thanks, > > Thomas. > > I think ttm_tt caching stuff does follow kernel policies outlined > in Documentation/x86/pat.txt well at least from understanding of > code i have right now through (call chains being sometimes hard > to fully follow). As also have another issue it seems that calling > set_memory_(uc|wc) while suspending lockup the cpu or at least doesn't > return, is this somethings i should expect ? > > Cheers, > Jerome >
Speaking about caching i think we should only call ttm_tt_set_placement_caching in mmap function as otherwise it's useless to waste time changing cache policy, even for bo_move_memcpy it should be fine as it's mostly about moving from wc (vram io mapped) to system or system to (wc io mapped) region, maybe move from system to tt might be problematic in terms of cache. Cheers, Jerome ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco. 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
