Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754228AbaKCSPu (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Nov 2014 13:15:50 -0500 Received: from g2t1383g.austin.hp.com ([15.217.136.92]:16630 "EHLO g2t1383g.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753931AbaKCSPr (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Nov 2014 13:15:47 -0500 Message-ID: <1415037686.10749.1.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] x86, mm, pat: Set WT to PA7 slot of PAT MSR From: Toshi Kani To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Juergen Gross , Stefan Bader , Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , Yigal Korman , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 11:01:26 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <1414450545-14028-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> <1414450545-14028-2-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> <1415036879.29109.26.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 10:08 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Toshi Kani wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 18:14 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Toshi Kani wrote: > >> > + } else { > >> > + /* > >> > + * PAT full support. WT is set to slot 7, which minimizes > >> > + * the risk of using the PAT bit as slot 3 is UC and is > >> > + * currently unused. Slot 4 should remain as reserved. > >> > >> This comment makes no sense. What minimizes which risk and what has > >> this to do with slot 3 and slot 4? > > > > This is for precaution. Since the patch enables the PAT bit the first > > time, it was suggested that we keep slot 4 reserved and set it to WB. > > The PAT bit still has no effect to slot 0/1/2 (WB/WC/UC-) after this > > patch. Slot 7 is the safest slot since slot 3 (UC) is unused today. > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/4/691 > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/5/394 > > > > I would clarify the comment, since this really has nothing to do with > slot 3 being unused. Right. > How about: > > We put WT in slot 7 to improve robustness in the presence of errata > that might cause the high PAT bit to be ignored. This way a buggy > slot 7 access will hit slot 3, and slot 3 is UC, so at worst we lose > performance without causing a correctness issue. Pentium 4 erratum > N46 is an example of such an erratum, although we try not to use PAT > at all on affected CPUs. That looks much better. :-) I will update the comment. Thanks! -Toshi -- 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/